The dog bowls I've encountered have either been hard plastic (slow feeder), metal, or pretty heavy ceramic that you'd need to really hit hard to break.
I think this is wrong. Sunak's speech was effective in showing that he understood what is worrying people, and that's half the battle. The first poll after the speech will be interesting and should show the scope that the Conservatives have in recovering lost ground - especially the ex-Tory "don't knows".
The 'pledges' are pretty risible, though. At least two of them will be achieved (or not), almost irrespective of what government does.
Something doesn't add up here. No wonder he needs remedial maths.
It is still an improvement on the Boris style of ruling by division, but on balance it is time for the electorate to tell them to go forth and multiply.
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about.
There's also a fallacy in the cartoon that the government can only be doing one thing at once, and also that if nothing is mentioned, nothing is being done.
That cartoon could be recycled for every 'drama' a government faces, with just a different setting and a slightly different wording.
Sunak’s Tories are now in the feedback doom loop where anything he or his ministers say is pre-judged as either bad or weak, because public opinion has decided they’re for the chop.
This is a non-fascist version of “our enemy is strong, and weak” thinking.
Hard line and typical Tory measures like the bill on industrial action are just confirmation they’re “bad”. And nobody is prepared to allow for good faith in these ideas
Moderately sensible or practical policy efforts - as mostly articulated in yesterdays speech - are just dismissed as weak and pathetic.
Yes. It why they are doomed, and why what they do now will only marginally change their fate.
The dog bowls I've encountered have either been hard plastic (slow feeder), metal, or pretty heavy ceramic that you'd need to really hit hard to break.
Lovely as it is, Sèvres can't take a lot of punishment.
So I see that in the US, McCarthy made another batch of procedural concessions including proposing that in future just one member could table a vote to remove the Speaker, without success, and it's still logjammed.
The Boebart-Gaetz faction is all in on 'kill everyone, destroy everything' nihilism.
Given that most of the other GOP congressmen will want to achieve something (and some will lose in 2024 if they don't) there's going to plenty of GOP internal strife, possibly bipartisanship to get some things done, followed by even more GOP internal strife.
I'm not sure how this resolves.
The Gaetz crew are nihilist obstructionists; is Congress is unable to do anything, that will achieve their aim. And by making a stand on the appointment of the Speaker, they've ensured stalemate.
The Democrats are highly unlikely to give the Republicans an easy way out of their self created mess, and it seems even less likely that a handful of Republicans might back the Democratic candidate.
Have any of the papers spotted Sunak's inability to distinguish deficit from debt yet?
Yes, I was a bit confused by that. The primary deficit isn't expected to be eliminated until 2024-25 with the wider measure of the full deficit in 2027-28.
He knows this so I can only assume he expects to beat the Autumn Statement by the end of this year and then wants to start making some token down-payments on it to impress the markets.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and I think this was a ruse to try and get the media/Labour to talk about the debt/deficit.
The country is in a bit of denial about how bad the fiscal situation is, but they're only willing to listen to Sunak/HMG in order to criticise them - so to get people to talk about the debt/deficit you have to say something to be criticised.
It's not good for Labour if the discussion moves away from how bad public services are, on to the fact that there is even less money than in 2010 to pay for them.
I don’t think that’s going out on a limb, I think it’s quite likely a ruse (or more charitably a tactic).
That’s what Westminster politics has become since 2015: electoral tactics. A permanent campaign, plus backbench game playing. And Labour are by no means innocent of this either. Look at congress this week for a taste of things to come: where the US leads we follow.
The dog bowls I've encountered have either been hard plastic (slow feeder), metal, or pretty heavy ceramic that you'd need to really hit hard to break.
I think this is wrong. Sunak's speech was effective in showing that he understood what is worrying people, and that's half the battle. The first poll after the speech will be interesting and should show the scope that the Conservatives have in recovering lost ground - especially the ex-Tory "don't knows".
The 'pledges' are pretty risible, though. At least two of them will be achieved (or not), almost irrespective of what government does.
Something doesn't add up here. No wonder he needs remedial maths.
It is still an improvement on the Boris style of ruling by division, but on balance it is time for the electorate to tell them to go forth and multiply.
At least he didn't tell us to knock it off with them negative waves.
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...
It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense. It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
It is clear the climate is changing and more action should be taken. But this is a global issue and not one we can solve alone.
Moreover all action comes with a cost (and the UK is already doing a lot). I think in difficult economic times a bread and butter agenda is the right strategy
Everything costs, but money invested in renewables insulates us from energy shocks like the one that we're in now. Oh, and the 'fuel' is free forever. It is a global issue and it isn't one we are solving alone, just look at the stats for China's renewables and the USA's Inflation Reduction Act. We should continue to do our bit out of enlightened self interest.
I agree with all that. But it shouldn’t be one of 5 or 6 pledges as it doesn’t really impact on people’s day to day & the activists will complain no matter what the government does
He talked about quite a lot that wasn't just the five pledges. In particular he talked about the future quite a lot, about making Britain the most innovative and productive economy. Ready to slip in a mention for the technology that is part of the great energy transition away from fossil fuels.
Does make you wonder why he avoided the topic.
Rishy Washy's five pledges were a bit weak and vague. That was not how Johnson would have done it.
STOP THE BOATS! END INFLATION! FIX THE NHS!
etc., etc. A form of words that people who call their evening meal "tea" would find relatable.
My theory is that Sunak was insufficiently bullied at school, thus has an excess of unmerited self-confidence and we're all suffering the consequences.
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about.
There's also a fallacy in the cartoon that the government can only be doing one thing at once, and also that if nothing is mentioned, nothing is being done.
That cartoon could be recycled for every 'drama' a government faces, with just a different setting and a slightly different wording.
It’s a cartoon not the Labour manifesto. And it’s splendid.
Good political cartoons typically take two concurrent news stories and blend them in a humorous way, while making a “point”. And the point here is that Sunak is missing in action on the health service crisis. His tone deafness on multiple subjects this week is remarkable.
You don’t need to think innumeracy is a non-issue to get that (and in any case innumeracy is not something you should be fixing in the 6th form, nor is a series of “ambitions” and no firm policy a recipe for success).
It is clear the climate is changing and more action should be taken. But this is a global issue and not one we can solve alone.
Moreover all action comes with a cost (and the UK is already doing a lot). I think in difficult economic times a bread and butter agenda is the right strategy
Everything costs, but money invested in renewables insulates us from energy shocks like the one that we're in now. Oh, and the 'fuel' is free forever. It is a global issue and it isn't one we are solving alone, just look at the stats for China's renewables and the USA's Inflation Reduction Act. We should continue to do our bit out of enlightened self interest.
I agree with all that. But it shouldn’t be one of 5 or 6 pledges as it doesn’t really impact on people’s day to day & the activists will complain no matter what the government does
He talked about quite a lot that wasn't just the five pledges. In particular he talked about the future quite a lot, about making Britain the most innovative and productive economy. Ready to slip in a mention for the technology that is part of the great energy transition away from fossil fuels.
Does make you wonder why he avoided the topic.
Rishy Washy's five pledges were a bit weak and vague. That was not how Johnson would have done it.
STOP THE BOATS! END INFLATION! FIX THE NHS!
etc., etc. A form of words that people who call their evening meal "tea" would find relatable.
My theory is that Sunak was insufficiently bullied at school, thus has an excess of unmerited self-confidence and we're all suffering the consequences.
Johnson would have added “SLAVA UKRAINI” to the list too. Rishi is intensely disinterested in foreign affairs.
Have any of the papers spotted Sunak's inability to distinguish deficit from debt yet?
Yes, I was a bit confused by that. The primary deficit isn't expected to be eliminated until 2024-25 with the wider measure of the full deficit in 2027-28.
He knows this so I can only assume he expects to beat the Autumn Statement by the end of this year and then wants to start making some token down-payments on it to impress the markets.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and I think this was a ruse to try and get the media/Labour to talk about the debt/deficit.
The country is in a bit of denial about how bad the fiscal situation is, but they're only willing to listen to Sunak/HMG in order to criticise them - so to get people to talk about the debt/deficit you have to say something to be criticised.
It's not good for Labour if the discussion moves away from how bad public services are, on to the fact that there is even less money than in 2010 to pay for them.
I don’t think that’s going out on a limb, I think it’s quite likely a ruse (or more charitably a tactic).
That’s what Westminster politics has become since 2015: electoral tactics. A permanent campaign, plus backbench game playing. And Labour are by no means innocent of this either. Look at congress this week for a taste of things to come: where the US leads we follow.
New Labour was all about trying to control the media narrative to match their agenda.
Hence the bizarre over reaction to Damian Green getting leaks of their media spinning operation - they saw that as an existential threat.
In the internet age, controlling the media like that has become much more difficult. The real story behind the Twitter Files stuff, is that government and political parties were trying to build an old style “press” relationship with Twitter.
So I see that in the US, McCarthy made another batch of procedural concessions including proposing that in future just one member could table a vote to remove the Speaker, without success, and it's still logjammed.
The Boebart-Gaetz faction is all in on 'kill everyone, destroy everything' nihilism.
Given that most of the other GOP congressmen will want to achieve something (and some will lose in 2024 if they don't) there's going to plenty of GOP internal strife, possibly bipartisanship to get some things done, followed by even more GOP internal strife.
I'm not sure how this resolves.
The Gaetz crew are nihilist obstructionists; is Congress is unable to do anything, that will achieve their aim. And by making a stand on the appointment of the Speaker, they've ensured stalemate.
The Democrats are highly unlikely to give the Republicans an easy way out of their self created mess, and it seems even less likely that a handful of Republicans might back the Democratic candidate.
It's interesting how MG and the gang are prepared to defy McCarthy's endorsement by DJT. MAGA World is finally moving beyond Trump. This isn't even its final form.
It is clear the climate is changing and more action should be taken. But this is a global issue and not one we can solve alone.
Moreover all action comes with a cost (and the UK is already doing a lot). I think in difficult economic times a bread and butter agenda is the right strategy
I disagree with you. The government is constantly and noisily attacked by people claiming to be green-inclined, stating that the government is not doing enough, or even anything. The truth is they have done blooming well in decarbonising since 2010 (building on earlier good work by Labour, although early wins are always easier).
It has been a massive success for the UK, albeit a somewhat painful one. People who make out this government has done nothing about it are not interested in preventing a climate catastrophe, but base politics.
Agreed, this morning we are getting 42% from renewables and 21% from nuclear. It is a remarkable success that will shortly get even better as 2 of the largest offshore windfarms in the world come on line. This looked like a very expensive investment by the UK which threatened our remaining heavy energy use businesses with excessive costs but given the current price of gas we got lucky.
We have been doing very well in decarbonising power generation. More to come with further wind, new build nuclear and thermal plants with carbon capture in the next few years.
However, we also need to decarbonise heat, industry and transport. Of these, heat is the big challenge - electrification (heat pumps) and/or fuel switch to hydrogen? Whatever we do, it is going to require £££££.
It is clear the climate is changing and more action should be taken. But this is a global issue and not one we can solve alone.
Moreover all action comes with a cost (and the UK is already doing a lot). I think in difficult economic times a bread and butter agenda is the right strategy
Everything costs, but money invested in renewables insulates us from energy shocks like the one that we're in now. Oh, and the 'fuel' is free forever. It is a global issue and it isn't one we are solving alone, just look at the stats for China's renewables and the USA's Inflation Reduction Act. We should continue to do our bit out of enlightened self interest.
I agree with all that. But it shouldn’t be one of 5 or 6 pledges as it doesn’t really impact on people’s day to day & the activists will complain no matter what the government does
He talked about quite a lot that wasn't just the five pledges. In particular he talked about the future quite a lot, about making Britain the most innovative and productive economy. Ready to slip in a mention for the technology that is part of the great energy transition away from fossil fuels.
Does make you wonder why he avoided the topic.
Rishy Washy's five pledges were a bit weak and vague. That was not how Johnson would have done it.
STOP THE BOATS! END INFLATION! FIX THE NHS!
etc., etc. A form of words that people who call their evening meal "tea" would find relatable.
My theory is that Sunak was insufficiently bullied at school, thus has an excess of unmerited self-confidence and we're all suffering the consequences.
Johnson would have added “SLAVA UKRAINI” to the list too. Rishi is intensely disinterested in foreign affairs.
Not a bad thing, given all the problems we have at home. Posturing on the world stage is a form of denial for too many politicians.
So I see that in the US, McCarthy made another batch of procedural concessions including proposing that in future just one member could table a vote to remove the Speaker, without success, and it's still logjammed.
The Boebart-Gaetz faction is all in on 'kill everyone, destroy everything' nihilism.
Given that most of the other GOP congressmen will want to achieve something (and some will lose in 2024 if they don't) there's going to plenty of GOP internal strife, possibly bipartisanship to get some things done, followed by even more GOP internal strife.
I'm not sure how this resolves.
The Gaetz crew are nihilist obstructionists; is Congress is unable to do anything, that will achieve their aim. And by making a stand on the appointment of the Speaker, they've ensured stalemate.
The Democrats are highly unlikely to give the Republicans an easy way out of their self created mess, and it seems even less likely that a handful of Republicans might back the Democratic candidate.
If the House is permanently stalemated then ultimately government will grind to a halt and a funding crisis will occur.
The GOP would be blamed but it still wouldn't be good for the country or for those politicians who want to get things done.
Certainly the Dems will want to extract concessions - which is likely to have the added advantage of causing further GOP internal strife.
It is clear the climate is changing and more action should be taken. But this is a global issue and not one we can solve alone.
Moreover all action comes with a cost (and the UK is already doing a lot). I think in difficult economic times a bread and butter agenda is the right strategy
Everything costs, but money invested in renewables insulates us from energy shocks like the one that we're in now. Oh, and the 'fuel' is free forever. It is a global issue and it isn't one we are solving alone, just look at the stats for China's renewables and the USA's Inflation Reduction Act. We should continue to do our bit out of enlightened self interest.
I agree with all that. But it shouldn’t be one of 5 or 6 pledges as it doesn’t really impact on people’s day to day & the activists will complain no matter what the government does
He talked about quite a lot that wasn't just the five pledges. In particular he talked about the future quite a lot, about making Britain the most innovative and productive economy. Ready to slip in a mention for the technology that is part of the great energy transition away from fossil fuels.
Does make you wonder why he avoided the topic.
Rishy Washy's five pledges were a bit weak and vague. That was not how Johnson would have done it.
STOP THE BOATS! END INFLATION! FIX THE NHS!
etc., etc. A form of words that people who call their evening meal "tea" would find relatable.
My theory is that Sunak was insufficiently bullied at school, thus has an excess of unmerited self-confidence and we're all suffering the consequences.
Johnson would have added “SLAVA UKRAINI” to the list too. Rishi is intensely disinterested in foreign affairs.
I think this is wrong. Sunak's speech was effective in showing that he understood what is worrying people, and that's half the battle. The first poll after the speech will be interesting and should show the scope that the Conservatives have in recovering lost ground - especially the ex-Tory "don't knows".
The 'pledges' are pretty risible, though. At least two of them will be achieved (or not), almost irrespective of what government does.
Oh, yes, I think the speech was entirely cynical in that sense, very much in the spirit of "I pledge that the sun will rise tomorrow". But all politicians do that sort of thing, and I think the speech shows him as a possibly effective politician for the first time. That's why it'll be interesting to see how much impact it has, or not - that will test the potential for a Tory recovery.
In coming months, problems will appear which will make people start to say "Oh, that was all talk", so a recovery will probably slip back somewhat. But I think he can reasonably hope that the lead will initially be cut from 20+ to the 10-15 range.
I think Sunak is consciously targeting wavering southern Tory voters in the hope of staunching the bleeding.
It is noticeable how his policy announcements are landing better in my southern marginal.
It is a core vote strategy like Brown's, and should be enough to keep Villiers and the rest in post after 2025.
Depending on the success of this, he can try to pivot on to the Red Wall battleground in late 2023 and early 2024, when better inflation and pay settlement news should get him a better reception.
Of course, that means he has to stay away from issues where the Conservative party's instincts are far away from the rest of the population - like the environment or even Brexit.
So I see that in the US, McCarthy made another batch of procedural concessions including proposing that in future just one member could table a vote to remove the Speaker, without success, and it's still logjammed.
The Boebart-Gaetz faction is all in on 'kill everyone, destroy everything' nihilism.
Given that most of the other GOP congressmen will want to achieve something (and some will lose in 2024 if they don't) there's going to plenty of GOP internal strife, possibly bipartisanship to get some things done, followed by even more GOP internal strife.
I agree.
The problem Republicans have is a group (not huge but not trivial where the majority is small) who simply cannot be bought off in the usual way, through committee assignments, pork for the district, and signature legislation. People like Boebert and Gaetz are only interested in TV bookings and campaign donations - there is literally nothing positive they want to achieve politically and nothing they can be offered.
It is interesting that a split has opened with Taylor-Greene, who is the most extreme of all in some respects... but her insanity is that of the true believer, so she ultimately wants to pursue her (mad) agenda via the political process.
It is also notable that the rebels are almost all in ultra-safe GOP districts. Pelosi had internal opponents and didn't carry the whole Democratic group in any of her three most recent terms - but her opponents were mostly moderates in marginal districts who ultimately wanted to register a protest without causing huge damage to the party.
I see Mike Smithson has swallowed the right wing newspapers trick of calling all Tory leaders by some cuddly moniker, Maggie, Boris, Rishie, they even called Theresa May, Theresa, even though clearly a lot more syllables than May. On the flip side Labour leaders are called by their surnames, (or something worse) it is a real bugbear of mine, please be consistent
So I see that in the US, McCarthy made another batch of procedural concessions including proposing that in future just one member could table a vote to remove the Speaker, without success, and it's still logjammed.
The Boebart-Gaetz faction is all in on 'kill everyone, destroy everything' nihilism.
Given that most of the other GOP congressmen will want to achieve something (and some will lose in 2024 if they don't) there's going to plenty of GOP internal strife, possibly bipartisanship to get some things done, followed by even more GOP internal strife.
I'm not sure how this resolves.
The Gaetz crew are nihilist obstructionists; is Congress is unable to do anything, that will achieve their aim. And by making a stand on the appointment of the Speaker, they've ensured stalemate.
The Democrats are highly unlikely to give the Republicans an easy way out of their self created mess, and it seems even less likely that a handful of Republicans might back the Democratic candidate.
If the House is permanently stalemated then ultimately government will grind to a halt and a funding crisis will occur...
That might be what forces a deal between the two parties, but it'a not going to happen easily. And certainly the Gaetz crew would be very happy with a funding crisis.
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about.
There's also a fallacy in the cartoon that the government can only be doing one thing at once, and also that if nothing is mentioned, nothing is being done.
That cartoon could be recycled for every 'drama' a government faces, with just a different setting and a slightly different wording.
You seem to have missed the joke. See how the two speech bubbles are related. The nurse has lost count not because she is innumerate but because there are too many patients awaiting treatment, and the Prime Minister says his numeracy programme will help the nurse to count.
It is clear the climate is changing and more action should be taken. But this is a global issue and not one we can solve alone.
Moreover all action comes with a cost (and the UK is already doing a lot). I think in difficult economic times a bread and butter agenda is the right strategy
Everything costs, but money invested in renewables insulates us from energy shocks like the one that we're in now. Oh, and the 'fuel' is free forever. It is a global issue and it isn't one we are solving alone, just look at the stats for China's renewables and the USA's Inflation Reduction Act. We should continue to do our bit out of enlightened self interest.
I agree with all that. But it shouldn’t be one of 5 or 6 pledges as it doesn’t really impact on people’s day to day & the activists will complain no matter what the government does
He talked about quite a lot that wasn't just the five pledges. In particular he talked about the future quite a lot, about making Britain the most innovative and productive economy. Ready to slip in a mention for the technology that is part of the great energy transition away from fossil fuels.
Does make you wonder why he avoided the topic.
Rishy Washy's five pledges were a bit weak and vague. That was not how Johnson would have done it.
STOP THE BOATS! END INFLATION! FIX THE NHS!
etc., etc. A form of words that people who call their evening meal "tea" would find relatable.
My theory is that Sunak was insufficiently bullied at school, thus has an excess of unmerited self-confidence and we're all suffering the consequences.
Johnson would have added “SLAVA UKRAINI” to the list too. Rishi is intensely disinterested in foreign affairs.
Not a bad thing, given all the problems we have at home. Posturing on the world stage is a form of denial for too many politicians.
Foreign affairs are important, as is the economy, as are health and education, constitutional issues and home affairs. It's notable that each of our last 3 PMs have had a preference for one or other and a disinterest in at least one important topic (I would say Cameron was more of an all rounder with moderate but not intense interest in most things).
May: very into home affairs and constitutional issues, uninterested in business or economics Johnson: mad for foreign affairs, infrastructure and the constitution, uninterested in the actual details of governing Truss: obsessed with the economy and fiscal policy, quite fond of foreign affairs, oblivious to pretty much everything else Sunak: equally obsessed with the economy and fiscal policy but not bothered about foreign policy, the environment or home affairs which he is happy to outsource to his crazy HS
It is clear the climate is changing and more action should be taken. But this is a global issue and not one we can solve alone.
Moreover all action comes with a cost (and the UK is already doing a lot). I think in difficult economic times a bread and butter agenda is the right strategy
Everything costs, but money invested in renewables insulates us from energy shocks like the one that we're in now. Oh, and the 'fuel' is free forever. It is a global issue and it isn't one we are solving alone, just look at the stats for China's renewables and the USA's Inflation Reduction Act. We should continue to do our bit out of enlightened self interest.
I agree with all that. But it shouldn’t be one of 5 or 6 pledges as it doesn’t really impact on people’s day to day & the activists will complain no matter what the government does
He talked about quite a lot that wasn't just the five pledges. In particular he talked about the future quite a lot, about making Britain the most innovative and productive economy. Ready to slip in a mention for the technology that is part of the great energy transition away from fossil fuels.
Does make you wonder why he avoided the topic.
Rishy Washy's five pledges were a bit weak and vague. That was not how Johnson would have done it.
STOP THE BOATS! END INFLATION! FIX THE NHS!
etc., etc. A form of words that people who call their evening meal "tea" would find relatable.
My theory is that Sunak was insufficiently bullied at school, thus has an excess of unmerited self-confidence and we're all suffering the consequences.
Johnson would have added “SLAVA UKRAINI” to the list too. Rishi is intensely disinterested in foreign affairs.
It is clear the climate is changing and more action should be taken. But this is a global issue and not one we can solve alone.
Moreover all action comes with a cost (and the UK is already doing a lot). I think in difficult economic times a bread and butter agenda is the right strategy
I think it would have been an utterly bizarre thing to mention. The speech was useless enough without tin-eared chuntering on about climate change.
You'd think if there was someone acceptable to all sides of the GOP it would have happened very quickly.
McCarthy's opponents don't seem to have a strategy beyond saying "no"....
That is their strategy. Should Congress go two full years without a Speaker, they would have achieved their aim.
The only alternative that would satisfy them would be one of their fellow anarchists elected to the chair.
That being the case then the rest of the GOP have to do a deal with the Dems to stay a Speaker.
Not sure how they benefits the anti-McCarthy faction. This is why I think McCarthy can exercise strategic patience. He'll wait for it to sink in to the rebels that they're stuck and that he'll do a deal with the Dems to bypass them if they're entirely unwilling to compromise.
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...
It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense. It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
"It's a significant issue"
It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.
And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.
I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.
You'd think if there was someone acceptable to all sides of the GOP it would have happened very quickly.
McCarthy's opponents don't seem to have a strategy beyond saying "no"....
That is their strategy. Should Congress go two full years without a Speaker, they would have achieved their aim.
The only alternative that would satisfy them would be one of their fellow anarchists elected to the chair.
That being the case then the rest of the GOP have to do a deal with the Dems to stay a Speaker.
Not sure how they benefits the anti-McCarthy faction. This is why I think McCarthy can exercise strategic patience. He'll wait for it to sink in to the rebels that they're stuck and that he'll do a deal with the Dems to bypass them if they're entirely unwilling to compromise.
The nuclear option would be to back a move to pluraity voting - for which there is ample, if rather old, precedent - and then insist on a right-wing candidate, or the Democrat gets in.
I see Mike Smithson has swallowed the right wing newspapers trick of calling all Tory leaders by some cuddly moniker, Maggie, Boris, Rishie, they even called Theresa May, Theresa, even though clearly a lot more syllables than May. On the flip side Labour leaders are called by their surnames, (or something worse) it is a real bugbear of mine, please be consistent
There is a point there but it's not quite that stark. Everyone calls Starmer "Keith". Miliband was definitely more Ed than not, Corbyn was Jezza and May was from memory always May, never Theresa. So was Major Major, Hague Hague, IDS IDS and Howard Howard. David Cameron was usually Cameron but occasionally call me Dave, but that wasn't flattering.
I see Mike Smithson has swallowed the right wing newspapers trick of calling all Tory leaders by some cuddly moniker, Maggie, Boris, Rishie, they even called Theresa May, Theresa, even though clearly a lot more syllables than May. On the flip side Labour leaders are called by their surnames, (or something worse) it is a real bugbear of mine, please be consistent
Major and May were always Major and May, and Cameron was always Cameron (unless someone was sneeringly calling him Dave).
I'm always polite to Sir Keir, recognising his achievement of earning that title.
Like, duh. This is apparent the moment he opens his mouth! (not saying this is a good or bad thing of course).
Rishi is the son of a doctor and pharmacist who went to one of the poshest schools in the country and on to the poshest university. Do Times columnists not read the papers?
Why aren't we paying nurses and ambulance staff more to deal with understaffing, regardless of the strikes? If we were running a factory we'd need to pay the salaries necessary to get staff. Leaving aside considerations of where it's best to tax, would people begrudge (say) 1p on tax to pay for adequate hospital care? Don't think so.
And yet, and yet, whenever a party tries to campaign on such a small increase they lose. Look at May's dementia tax - all those entitled children fretting about not inheriting Mummy and Daddy's wealth, and thinking everyone else should pay for their care when its needed.
Wills rips Harry's necklace and Harry falls on top of the dog bowl. So Harry calls his therapist. Yet it is claimed that Meghan was suicidal but she was denied psychiatric help.
You'd think if there was someone acceptable to all sides of the GOP it would have happened very quickly.
McCarthy's opponents don't seem to have a strategy beyond saying "no"....
That is their strategy. Should Congress go two full years without a Speaker, they would have achieved their aim.
The only alternative that would satisfy them would be one of their fellow anarchists elected to the chair.
That being the case then the rest of the GOP have to do a deal with the Dems to stay a Speaker.
Not sure how they benefits the anti-McCarthy faction. This is why I think McCarthy can exercise strategic patience. He'll wait for it to sink in to the rebels that they're stuck and that he'll do a deal with the Dems to bypass them if they're entirely unwilling to compromise.
The nuclear option would be to back a move to pluraity voting - for which there is ample, if rather old, precedent - and then insist on a right-wing candidate, or the Democrat gets in.
Ah, yes.
Is there any betting on the outcome? What are the odds that the Democrat gets it?
Like, duh. This is apparent the moment he opens his mouth! (not saying this is a good or bad thing of course).
Rishi is the son of a doctor and pharmacist who went to one of the poshest schools in the country and on to the poshest university. Do Times columnists not read the papers?
Amusingly in the comments someone is arguing he’s made himself posh and is therefore self-hating, as if being Asian means he must have grown up working class.
Why aren't we paying nurses and ambulance staff more to deal with understaffing, regardless of the strikes? If we were running a factory we'd need to pay the salaries necessary to get staff. Leaving aside considerations of where it's best to tax, would people begrudge (say) 1p on tax to pay for adequate hospital care? Don't think so.
And yet, and yet, whenever a party tries to campaign on such a small increase they lose. Look at May's dementia tax - all those entitled children fretting about not inheriting Mummy and Daddy's wealth, and thinking everyone else should pay for their care when its needed.
Everyone is in favour of tax rises. For The Rich Barstewards.
How do you define rich? That’s easy - twice the income, or more, of whoever you ask.
Wills rips Harry's necklace and Harry falls on top of the dog bowl. So Harry calls his therapist. Yet it is claimed that Meghan was suicidal but she was denied psychiatric help.
Denied by whom?
I think it was a vague reference to the powers that be at the Palace. I can't say that I've studied every detail. I'm getting bored with the whole thing now.
It is clear the climate is changing and more action should be taken. But this is a global issue and not one we can solve alone.
Moreover all action comes with a cost (and the UK is already doing a lot). I think in difficult economic times a bread and butter agenda is the right strategy
Everything costs, but money invested in renewables insulates us from energy shocks like the one that we're in now. Oh, and the 'fuel' is free forever. It is a global issue and it isn't one we are solving alone, just look at the stats for China's renewables and the USA's Inflation Reduction Act. We should continue to do our bit out of enlightened self interest.
I agree with all that. But it shouldn’t be one of 5 or 6 pledges as it doesn’t really impact on people’s day to day & the activists will complain no matter what the government does
He talked about quite a lot that wasn't just the five pledges. In particular he talked about the future quite a lot, about making Britain the most innovative and productive economy. Ready to slip in a mention for the technology that is part of the great energy transition away from fossil fuels.
Does make you wonder why he avoided the topic.
Rishy Washy's five pledges were a bit weak and vague. That was not how Johnson would have done it.
STOP THE BOATS! END INFLATION! FIX THE NHS!
etc., etc. A form of words that people who call their evening meal "tea" would find relatable.
My theory is that Sunak was insufficiently bullied at school, thus has an excess of unmerited self-confidence and we're all suffering the consequences.
Johnson would have added “SLAVA UKRAINI” to the list too. Rishi is intensely disinterested in foreign affairs.
uninterested
Yes, you're quite right. Uninterested
Boswell uses disinterested in that sense in the Life of Johnson. Good enough for him, good enough for me.
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...
It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense. It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
"It's a significant issue"
It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.
And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.
I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.
How does Sunak's floated idea address any of that ?
I see Mike Smithson has swallowed the right wing newspapers trick of calling all Tory leaders by some cuddly moniker, Maggie, Boris, Rishie, they even called Theresa May, Theresa, even though clearly a lot more syllables than May. On the flip side Labour leaders are called by their surnames, (or something worse) it is a real bugbear of mine, please be consistent
Major and May were always Major and May, and Cameron was always Cameron (unless someone was sneeringly calling him Dave).
I'm always polite to Sir Keir, recognising his achievement of earning that title.
I agree that people read to much into this. I think the name used is just a consequence of how common/rare a name is and how many syllables it has. Dave and John are too common a name to be specific. May is one syllable so easier to us. If you say Boris it is obvious who are are talking about.
I see Mike Smithson has swallowed the right wing newspapers trick of calling all Tory leaders by some cuddly moniker, Maggie, Boris, Rishie, they even called Theresa May, Theresa, even though clearly a lot more syllables than May. On the flip side Labour leaders are called by their surnames, (or something worse) it is a real bugbear of mine, please be consistent
Major and May were always Major and May, and Cameron was always Cameron (unless someone was sneeringly calling him Dave).
I'm always polite to Sir Keir, recognising his achievement of earning that title.
I'm pretty sure Cameron was called Cam, I can't remember that far back for Major, but remember by then the sun had got behind Blair
I see Mike Smithson has swallowed the right wing newspapers trick of calling all Tory leaders by some cuddly moniker, Maggie, Boris, Rishie, they even called Theresa May, Theresa, even though clearly a lot more syllables than May. On the flip side Labour leaders are called by their surnames, (or something worse) it is a real bugbear of mine, please be consistent
Major and May were always Major and May, and Cameron was always Cameron (unless someone was sneeringly calling him Dave).
I'm always polite to Sir Keir, recognising his achievement of earning that title.
I'm pretty sure Cameron was called Cam, I can't remember that far back for Major, but remember by then the sun had got behind Blair
Cameron's wife was called SamCam. Cameron was sometimes called "Call Me Dave" because he asked people to call him Dave.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
Wills rips Harry's necklace and Harry falls on top of the dog bowl. So Harry calls his therapist. Yet it is claimed that Meghan was suicidal but she was denied psychiatric help.
I see Mike Smithson has swallowed the right wing newspapers trick of calling all Tory leaders by some cuddly moniker, Maggie, Boris, Rishie, they even called Theresa May, Theresa, even though clearly a lot more syllables than May. On the flip side Labour leaders are called by their surnames, (or something worse) it is a real bugbear of mine, please be consistent
Major and May were always Major and May, and Cameron was always Cameron (unless someone was sneeringly calling him Dave).
I'm always polite to Sir Keir, recognising his achievement of earning that title.
I agree that people read to much into this. I think the name used is just a consequence of how common/rare a name is and how many syllables it has. Dave and John are too common a name to be specific. May is one syllable so easier to us. If you say Boris it is obvious who are are talking about.
Indeed. With Boris in particular before he was PM it was necessary disambiguation - when he came on the scene "Johnson" meant Alan - so naturally it stuck.
I see Mike Smithson has swallowed the right wing newspapers trick of calling all Tory leaders by some cuddly moniker, Maggie, Boris, Rishie, they even called Theresa May, Theresa, even though clearly a lot more syllables than May. On the flip side Labour leaders are called by their surnames, (or something worse) it is a real bugbear of mine, please be consistent
Major and May were always Major and May, and Cameron was always Cameron (unless someone was sneeringly calling him Dave).
I'm always polite to Sir Keir, recognising his achievement of earning that title.
I agree that people read to much into this. I think the name used is just a consequence of how common/rare a name is and how many syllables it has. Dave and John are too common a name to be specific. May is one syllable so easier to us. If you say Boris it is obvious who are are talking about.
"Boris" was most definitely part of ABdP Johnson's carefully curated brand and anyone who thinks their use of it is either neutral or something they have adopted independently is being incredibly naive. Sunak is attempting something similar with "Rishi" but as with most of his efforts in this area he is falling short of the master propagandist.
I see Mike Smithson has swallowed the right wing newspapers trick of calling all Tory leaders by some cuddly moniker, Maggie, Boris, Rishie, they even called Theresa May, Theresa, even though clearly a lot more syllables than May. On the flip side Labour leaders are called by their surnames, (or something worse) it is a real bugbear of mine, please be consistent
Major and May were always Major and May, and Cameron was always Cameron (unless someone was sneeringly calling him Dave).
I'm always polite to Sir Keir, recognising his achievement of earning that title.
I'm pretty sure Cameron was called Cam, I can't remember that far back for Major, but remember by then the sun had got behind Blair
Why aren't we paying nurses and ambulance staff more to deal with understaffing, regardless of the strikes? If we were running a factory we'd need to pay the salaries necessary to get staff. Leaving aside considerations of where it's best to tax, would people begrudge (say) 1p on tax to pay for adequate hospital care? Don't think so.
Especially as we end up paying even more for agency staff on short-term contracts, anyway. Penny-wise, pound-foolish.
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
I see Mike Smithson has swallowed the right wing newspapers trick of calling all Tory leaders by some cuddly moniker, Maggie, Boris, Rishie, they even called Theresa May, Theresa, even though clearly a lot more syllables than May. On the flip side Labour leaders are called by their surnames, (or something worse) it is a real bugbear of mine, please be consistent
Major and May were always Major and May, and Cameron was always Cameron (unless someone was sneeringly calling him Dave).
I'm always polite to Sir Keir, recognising his achievement of earning that title.
I'm pretty sure Cameron was called Cam, I can't remember that far back for Major, but remember by then the sun had got behind Blair
I think you are seeing to much into this. Blair was often called Tony, Major was called Major. I think you are wrong on May as she was commonly called May. It has nothing to do with politics, but the ease with which you can uniquely identify someone with as few syllables as possible.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
I’m tempted to forward that to a friend whose Remaniac neighbour would be on that like a ramp on chips.
When I say Remainiac I mean it. @Scott_xP would be terrified by the… intensity.
You'd think if there was someone acceptable to all sides of the GOP it would have happened very quickly.
McCarthy's opponents don't seem to have a strategy beyond saying "no"....
That is their strategy. Should Congress go two full years without a Speaker, they would have achieved their aim.
The only alternative that would satisfy them would be one of their fellow anarchists elected to the chair.
That being the case then the rest of the GOP have to do a deal with the Dems to stay a Speaker.
Not sure how they benefits the anti-McCarthy faction. This is why I think McCarthy can exercise strategic patience. He'll wait for it to sink in to the rebels that they're stuck and that he'll do a deal with the Dems to bypass them if they're entirely unwilling to compromise.
The nuclear option would be to back a move to pluraity voting - for which there is ample, if rather old, precedent - and then insist on a right-wing candidate, or the Democrat gets in.
Ah, yes.
Is there any betting on the outcome? What are the odds that the Democrat gets it?
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...
It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense. It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
"It's a significant issue"
It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.
And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.
I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.
How does Sunak's floated idea address any of that ?
That will obviously depend on the details, and I'd prefer it more strongly mentioned. However, note the cartoon references a 'numeracy problem', so the message was clear to the cartoonist. It's just a shame he thinks it's of such minor importance.
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
I can't imagine why our political and media culture makes ministers unwilling to fail.
Like, duh. This is apparent the moment he opens his mouth! (not saying this is a good or bad thing of course).
It's a bit worse than that.
Dave was posh in a noblesse oblige way, Boris was posh in a roistering boisterous way- the sort of posh bloke who the plebs adore.
Rishi is more upper upper upper middle class. Lots of money but with a side order of cultural cringe. Jabs at the wealth of Dave and Boris pinged off them somehow, whereas it's different for the current PM
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.
I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.
Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to
1) Only fund winners 2) Big projects only 3) Had to be production ready, not research
So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.
It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
There's also a short critique of our university spinout process here (which links to the FT story).
Maggie Major Tone Gordo Dave TMay BoJo Truss Rishi EICIPM Jezza SKS
All this talk of politician names reminds me of a book I once read set in an alternative Europe that the Nazis had won WWII. Britain was run by the British Union of Fascists, whose leader was called Charlie Lynton. Subtle as a brick...
You'd think if there was someone acceptable to all sides of the GOP it would have happened very quickly.
McCarthy's opponents don't seem to have a strategy beyond saying "no"....
That is their strategy. Should Congress go two full years without a Speaker, they would have achieved their aim.
The only alternative that would satisfy them would be one of their fellow anarchists elected to the chair.
That being the case then the rest of the GOP have to do a deal with the Dems to stay a Speaker.
Not sure how they benefits the anti-McCarthy faction. This is why I think McCarthy can exercise strategic patience. He'll wait for it to sink in to the rebels that they're stuck and that he'll do a deal with the Dems to bypass them if they're entirely unwilling to compromise.
The nuclear option would be to back a move to pluraity voting - for which there is ample, if rather old, precedent - and then insist on a right-wing candidate, or the Democrat gets in.
Ah, yes.
Is there any betting on the outcome? What are the odds that the Democrat gets it?
It would be a question of who blinked first - since I doubt the backers of these ultra right-wingers would be that pleased if their games saw a Dem return to the chair.
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
One example which springs to mind is First Light Fusion. high risk - but incredibly high return should it pay off. They are building a pilot plant in Canada, partly because of funding.
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
You are going to have move a lot of civil servants - or at least their mindsets - to achieve that.
John Bull @garius · 16s Replying to @garius QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
No. Because a personal union means two different countries with the same monarch, not one country. Just as Britain being in personal union with Hanover from 1714 to 1837 didn't make Britain part of the Holy Roman Empire or more pertinently the Zollverein.
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...
It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense. It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
"It's a significant issue"
It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.
And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.
I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.
The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
One example which springs to mind is First Light Fusion. high risk - but incredibly high return should it pay off. They are building a pilot plant in Canada, partly because of funding.
Something happening at West Burton A along those lines I think.
So I see that in the US, McCarthy made another batch of procedural concessions including proposing that in future just one member could table a vote to remove the Speaker, without success, and it's still logjammed.
The Boebart-Gaetz faction is all in on 'kill everyone, destroy everything' nihilism.
Given that most of the other GOP congressmen will want to achieve something (and some will lose in 2024 if they don't) there's going to plenty of GOP internal strife, possibly bipartisanship to get some things done, followed by even more GOP internal strife.
I'm not sure how this resolves.
The Gaetz crew are nihilist obstructionists; is Congress is unable to do anything, that will achieve their aim. And by making a stand on the appointment of the Speaker, they've ensured stalemate.
The Democrats are highly unlikely to give the Republicans an easy way out of their self created mess, and it seems even less likely that a handful of Republicans might back the Democratic candidate.
If the House is permanently stalemated then ultimately government will grind to a halt and a funding crisis will occur...
That might be what forces a deal between the two parties, but it'a not going to happen easily. And certainly the Gaetz crew would be very happy with a funding crisis.
Gaetz and friends wouldn’t care if Congress was totally logjammed and unable to do anything for the next two years.
A fair few more Republicans would be happy if Congress does nothing except call for investigations into the president and his family for the next two years, preferably with the debt ceiling not raised so the federal government shuts down for a few months.
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
When I was young and stupid I tried talking to politicians.
I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.
Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to
1) Only fund winners 2) Big projects only 3) Had to be production ready, not research
So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.
It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.
Military based - but has also spawned analogues in the US - like the energy version: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPA-E Which received a boost in funding form Biden's big spending bill.
All small projects, all short terms for quick results for particular problems - and sits in the gap between science research and industry product development, for stuff which otherwise doesn't get funding.
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
You are going to have move a lot of civil servants - or at least their mindsets - to achieve that.
No. You set up structures outside of government departments.
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
You are going to have move a lot of civil servants - or at least their mindsets - to achieve that.
Speaking of moving civil servants, how's that rocket for the DfE coming along @Malmesbury ?
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...
It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense. It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
"It's a significant issue"
It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.
And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.
I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.
The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!
It all depends on the details, doesn't it? If it's talking about remedial maths etc, then brilliant. If it's getting people who have got the basics to learn more complex maths that is useful in everyday life, then good (although pressures on the curriculum and finance are obvious issues).
The UK’s dream of becoming a ‘science superpower’ Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
It needs one thing as well: a willingness to fail. We're far too keen to only back certain winners, and in the process miss out on potential great wins. That does not mean we back 'stupid' things; just that we've got to be willing to take bigger risks for bigger pay-offs.
It's also industrial base. Oxford Photovoltaics is a world leader in perovskite science - but the new solar panel manufacturing plants are being built in Germany.
That *may* have been a good cartoon if innumeracy wasn't a massive problem. Governments can - and should - be able to address multiple issues at once.
Since there are few details on either plan, and the few regarding the maths one look bad on their face, the cartoon seems more successful than the speech.
I disagree. No-one ever effing well talks about innumeracy, and it is a massive drag on the country and on the people who have been let down by their parents and the schools system. It is a national disgrace, and at least it's being talked about...
It's certainly a significant issue, but the idea that Sunak has floated seems sheer fantasy, and isn't going to address it.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense. It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
"It's a significant issue"
It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.
And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.
I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.
The fact that he's talking about solving innumeracy by getting people to study 'mathematics' until the age of 18 suggests he doesn't have much of a clue!
It all depends on the details, doesn't it? If it's talking about remedial maths etc, then brilliant. If it's getting people who have got the basics to learn more complex maths that is useful in everyday life, then good (although pressures on the curriculum and finance are obvious issues).
There's zero point in raising the school leaving age from 16 to 18 if kids are still leaving school without basic skills, is it?
But again, we keep coming back to, wouldn't it be more useful to ask why they're not getting it by age 16 after 11-12 years of hard work, rather than assuming more of the same will fix it?
So I see that in the US, McCarthy made another batch of procedural concessions including proposing that in future just one member could table a vote to remove the Speaker, without success, and it's still logjammed.
The Boebart-Gaetz faction is all in on 'kill everyone, destroy everything' nihilism.
Given that most of the other GOP congressmen will want to achieve something (and some will lose in 2024 if they don't) there's going to plenty of GOP internal strife, possibly bipartisanship to get some things done, followed by even more GOP internal strife.
I'm not sure how this resolves.
The Gaetz crew are nihilist obstructionists; is Congress is unable to do anything, that will achieve their aim. And by making a stand on the appointment of the Speaker, they've ensured stalemate.
The Democrats are highly unlikely to give the Republicans an easy way out of their self created mess, and it seems even less likely that a handful of Republicans might back the Democratic candidate.
If the House is permanently stalemated then ultimately government will grind to a halt and a funding crisis will occur...
That might be what forces a deal between the two parties, but it'a not going to happen easily. And certainly the Gaetz crew would be very happy with a funding crisis.
Gaetz and friends wouldn’t care if Congress was totally logjammed and unable to do anything for the next two years.
A fair few more Republicans would be happy if Congress does nothing except call for investigations into the president and his family for the next two years, preferably with the debt ceiling not raised so the federal government shuts down for a few months.
Comments
The dog bowls I've encountered have either been hard plastic (slow feeder), metal, or pretty heavy ceramic that you'd need to really hit hard to break.
There's also a fallacy in the cartoon that the government can only be doing one thing at once, and also that if nothing is mentioned, nothing is being done.
That cartoon could be recycled for every 'drama' a government faces, with just a different setting and a slightly different wording.
Raising at as an issue would be regarded as too “technical” by journalists who don’t understand the difference. Or want to understand the difference.
1st : 203
2nd : 203
3rd: 202
4th: 201
5th: 201
6th: 201
It's slow - but the trend ain't his friend.
The Gaetz crew are nihilist obstructionists; is Congress is unable to do anything, that will achieve their aim. And by making a stand on the appointment of the Speaker, they've ensured stalemate.
The Democrats are highly unlikely to give the Republicans an easy way out of their self created mess, and it seems even less likely that a handful of Republicans might back the Democratic candidate.
That’s what Westminster politics has become since 2015: electoral tactics. A permanent campaign, plus backbench game playing. And Labour are by no means innocent of this either. Look at congress this week for a taste of things to come: where the US leads we follow.
And note while there has been some increase in school funding, there's been none at all for 6th forms and FE colleges, which are the ones supposed to deliver it.
It's just nonsense.
It appears quite similar in concept to the legal duties the Tories placed on Local Authorities, at the same time as they steadily reduced the funding available to them.
(& FWIW, we talk about education quite a bit on this board. Some of us even make positive suggestions from time to time.)
STOP THE BOATS!
END INFLATION!
FIX THE NHS!
etc., etc. A form of words that people who call their evening meal "tea" would find relatable.
My theory is that Sunak was insufficiently bullied at school, thus has an excess of unmerited self-confidence and we're all suffering the consequences.
Good political cartoons typically take two concurrent news stories and blend them in a humorous way, while making a “point”. And the point here is that Sunak is missing in action on the health service crisis. His tone deafness on multiple subjects this week is remarkable.
You don’t need to think innumeracy is a non-issue to get that (and in any case innumeracy is not something you should be fixing in the 6th form, nor is a series of “ambitions” and no firm policy a recipe for success).
You'd think if there was someone acceptable to all sides of the GOP it would have happened very quickly.
McCarthy's opponents don't seem to have a strategy beyond saying "no". Perhaps McCarthy reckons he can wait them out?
Hence the bizarre over reaction to Damian Green getting leaks of their media spinning operation - they saw that as an existential threat.
In the internet age, controlling the media like that has become much more difficult. The real story behind the Twitter Files stuff, is that government and political parties were trying to build an old style “press” relationship with Twitter.
However, we also need to decarbonise heat, industry and transport. Of these, heat is the big challenge - electrification (heat pumps) and/or fuel switch to hydrogen? Whatever we do, it is going to require £££££.
The GOP would be blamed but it still wouldn't be good for the country or for those politicians who want to get things done.
Certainly the Dems will want to extract concessions - which is likely to have the added advantage of causing further GOP internal strife.
I have returned to London, back at therapy and back running.
The days get slightly longer each day - and every day a little brighter.
Should Congress go two full years without a Speaker, they would have achieved their aim.
The only alternative that would satisfy them would be one of their fellow anarchists elected to the chair.
It is noticeable how his policy announcements are landing better in my southern marginal.
It is a core vote strategy like Brown's, and should be enough to keep Villiers and the rest in post after 2025.
Depending on the success of this, he can try to pivot on to the Red Wall battleground in late 2023 and early 2024, when better inflation and pay settlement news should get him a better reception.
Of course, that means he has to stay away from issues where the Conservative party's instincts are far away from the rest of the population - like the environment or even Brexit.
The problem Republicans have is a group (not huge but not trivial where the majority is small) who simply cannot be bought off in the usual way, through committee assignments, pork for the district, and signature legislation. People like Boebert and Gaetz are only interested in TV bookings and campaign donations - there is literally nothing positive they want to achieve politically and nothing they can be offered.
It is interesting that a split has opened with Taylor-Greene, who is the most extreme of all in some respects... but her insanity is that of the true believer, so she ultimately wants to pursue her (mad) agenda via the political process.
It is also notable that the rebels are almost all in ultra-safe GOP districts. Pelosi had internal opponents and didn't carry the whole Democratic group in any of her three most recent terms - but her opponents were mostly moderates in marginal districts who ultimately wanted to register a protest without causing huge damage to the party.
https://twitter.com/DAaronovitch/status/1610922828722839554
And certainly the Gaetz crew would be very happy with a funding crisis.
May: very into home affairs and constitutional issues, uninterested in business or economics
Johnson: mad for foreign affairs, infrastructure and the constitution, uninterested in the actual details of governing
Truss: obsessed with the economy and fiscal policy, quite fond of foreign affairs, oblivious to pretty much everything else
Sunak: equally obsessed with the economy and fiscal policy but not bothered about foreign policy, the environment or home affairs which he is happy to outsource to his crazy HS
Not sure how they benefits the anti-McCarthy faction. This is why I think McCarthy can exercise strategic patience. He'll wait for it to sink in to the rebels that they're stuck and that he'll do a deal with the Dems to bypass them if they're entirely unwilling to compromise.
It's a fucking significant issue that's been routinely ignored and downgraded, even on here, because it's difficult to tackle and easy to push onto the 'ignore' pile. The 'nonsense' is the idea that somehow if we ignore it, it will automagically get fixed.
And why does it get ignored? Perhaps IMV because the movers and shakers, the people who decide things, whether they are from the local comp or Eton, are all literate and numerate. All the regular posters on here will be. We can all suffer illness or disability; be struck down with a stroke or cancer. Therefore these issues matter to us. But we will never be illiterate or innumerate in the way kids let down in childhood are.
I'm the only person who mentions functional innumeracy and illiteracy on here, and have for a decade. It routinely gets yawns and talks of more 'interesting' topics. Yet it is vital. The educational 'talk' on here is routinely about the top-end, GCSE ad A-level results; grammar schools etc. IMO that's not where the problems are.
The nuclear option would be to back a move to pluraity voting - for which there is ample, if rather old, precedent - and then insist on a right-wing candidate, or the Democrat gets in.
I'm always polite to Sir Keir, recognising his achievement of earning that title.
Is there any betting on the outcome? What are the odds that the Democrat gets it?
·
Jan 4
Out of respect for the privacy of his family, Prince Harry has announced that he is a candidate for Speaker of the House.
https://twitter.com/ScottWalker/status/1610453156671922176?s=20&t=Zk3DzblRFXOqtt_aMj2RVg
How do you define rich? That’s easy - twice the income, or more, of whoever you ask.
That is New Labour for a new age, this has Blair all over it. As I reported here many months ago, Blair is deeply involved with this project.
Watch live here ⬇️ https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/01/05/rishi-sunak-news-latest-policies-nhs-inflation-strikes-education/
https://twitter.com/garius/status/1610939574590603266
John Bull
@garius
·
16s
Replying to
@garius
QUESTION FOR THE EXPERTS: If the French back a Harry-led invasion and seizure of the crown, then he reasserts his right to the French throne, reverse invades and restores the French monarchy in a personal union with the British one...
...does that get us back into the EU?
Later, the Sun set on Brown.
Ministers want to supercharge the £89bn life science industry. But it will take long-term thinking on investment, talent and infrastructure
https://www.ft.com/content/a8b2c939-88da-45ca-a74e-9f49bb8c8c1c
PS I'm not a Tory and I call Boris, Boris.
When I say Remainiac I mean it. @Scott_xP would be terrified by the… intensity.
Speaker of the House in next Congress
Kevin McCarthy 44.64% 2.24
Steve Scalise 35.97% 2.78
Elise Stefanik 5.88% 17
Jim Jordan 5.56% 18
Jim Banks 0.56% 180
Hakeem Jeffries 2.50% 40
Donald Trump 0.83% 120
Katherine Clark 0.33% 300
https://smarkets.com/event/42246329/politics/us/2022-house-and-senate-elections/speaker-of-the-house-in-next-congress
The War Of The Windsors is hotting up I see!
Maggie
Major
Tone
Gordo
Dave
TMay
BoJo
Truss
Rishi
EICIPM
Jezza
SKS
Dave was posh in a noblesse oblige way, Boris was posh in a roistering boisterous way- the sort of posh bloke who the plebs adore.
Rishi is more upper upper upper middle class. Lots of money but with a side order of cultural cringe. Jabs at the wealth of Dave and Boris pinged off them somehow, whereas it's different for the current PM
I used to push the idea of DARPA for the U.K.
Various politicians told me that this was a great idea apart from needing to
1) Only fund winners
2) Big projects only
3) Had to be production ready, not research
So apart from completely the opposite of the DARPA, great idea.
It’s the same the other side of the Atlantic - but DARPA got entrenched before the politicians could “improve” it. Apparently, they still try.
@pmdfoster and @DanielThomasLDN writing about the UK's dream to become a science superpower...
...while it stubbornly refuses to think long-term or take any risks on R&D...🧵
https://twitter.com/nathanbenaich/status/1610935229954551813
Part of it is simply capital base. The US is ten times our size, so promising startups chasing funding tend to migrate there.
EDIT Oh, much as you might try to move the goalposts, he'll always be Boris....
They are building a pilot plant in Canada, partly because of funding.
A fair few more Republicans would be happy if Congress does nothing except call for investigations into the president and his family for the next two years, preferably with the debt ceiling not raised so the federal government shuts down for a few months.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARPA-E
Which received a boost in funding form Biden's big spending bill.
All small projects, all short terms for quick results for particular problems - and sits in the gap between science research and industry product development, for stuff which otherwise doesn't get funding.
I'd also like to see adult literacy and numeracy projects given much more funding and encouragement. It's not just a case of fixing it in the next generation; it's a case of fixing it for all those that have failed, and been failed. e.g. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/multiply-funding-available-to-improve-numeracy-skills
There's zero point in raising the school leaving age from 16 to 18 if kids are still leaving school without basic skills, is it?
Oxford Photovoltaics is a world leader in perovskite science - but the new solar panel manufacturing plants are being built in Germany.