Just returned from a party and I see I’m now a lefty. Not voted Labour since 1997 but I suppose it’s all relative.
I know it’s a page old now but I’d asked if one of the posters was proposing a full on US style healthcare system. This is because what was being mooted was choice on whether or not to take insurance, choice of provider, and an escalating service quality depending on payment. That is much closer to the US system than anything in Europe.
Anyway interesting anecdotes from some snatched semi-political conversations at this party, with a couple of people closer to the boomer end of Gen X than I am. And I can announce that I’ve found the 16%
- The problems in the NHS are the fault of strikers - I’d never step inside a Lidl (what, even for the wine?) - Sir Keir will be inviting Mick Lynch in for beer and sandwiches once he’s inside no10
But, and this is notably different from what you’d get in an equivalent conversation in the US: “climate change, big worry isn’t it. Good for your vineyard mate but it really seems to getting out of control”
They should try visiting Scotland. Ice Age 2 is more like it.
Last thing we need to worry about is Global Bloody Warming for sure. Howling gales and rain yet again.
Harry’s book is a personal disaster. Forget @Oprah and @netflix, this finishes him in the eyes of @RoyalFamily and mainstream British public. He’s also now a target for every disaffected jihadi or nutter looking to make a name for themselves. His family too. Shocking foolishness.
He seems to be “finished in the eyes of the British public” every week since two Easters ago.
In reality, who the fuck cares?
I had a flicker of interest on hearing about the horsey older woman in the pub car park. I’m still not entirely sure if that was actually in the leaked book but I assume for now it was.
Wouldn’t it have been so much better if spare had been a rip roaring yarn about a royal Fitz and the hilarious but risqué scrapes the old blighter had got himself into during his delinquent youth.
The whole Royal family psychodrama just isn’t remotely interesting or relevant.
The media frenzy would disagree with your conclusion. They clearly believe the public find it interesting and relevant.
The GOP can't allow itself to be blackmailed by its numpty fringe. They got elected as Republicans, if they can't support their party they should resign and stand again as independents.
You would prefer nodding donkeys to people with their own minds. Kind of shows why UK is such a shithole.
There is a middle ground between loons and donkeys.
We probably have MPs rebel more often than in the US House in fact. They could only muster up a handful of rebels over condeming an Insurrection. Labour and the Tories by contrast have well known awkward squads.
Personally think Steve Scalise is most available AND likely option.
What do we know about Scalise's politics? I know he's McCarthy's deputy so it may be hard to tell them apart in terms of actions, but is he close to Trump, for instance?
Quite interesting to see a few posters outing themselves as ex-Tories. I wouldn't have easily guessed from the tone of their posts in most cases. Which is somewhat of a problem for the Blue team just now. Especially if they are shedding 1997 Tory voters.
I voted Conservative in 2010, and thought the Coalition the best period of government in recent history. I won't be doing so again, at least not until we have a Conservative leader apologise for Brexit and how it was handled.
I don't like Starmer, and will look carefully at the candidates next GE. I could vote Labour for the right candidate but more likely Lib Dem.
So you support years of austerity, where nurses pay was definitely squeezed, but not the pay of everyone, and what that has done to public services? Surely that government you praise actually done the mostest to set up the crisis in vacancies, stitching up the current crop of leading politicians?
When 2010-15 government entered into austerity, to solve a problem they bigged up that’s not a patch on what it is today after further years of conservatives, that government should have known the central plank of their policy would be the inherent vice of lowering incomes, leading to problem to recruit and retain skilled staff? How did they imagine winning a third term, by putting right all the damage caused by austerity in their first? the years of that government you actually done the most to set up the current crisis in health and social services - whilst it’s so clear now, we weren’t all in it together either - nurses income drop, rich people big tax cuts.
So arguably neither a clever long term plan, or remotely fair?
Certainly at the beginning of the Coalition the Austerity programme was needed to reestablish economic credibility in the land. It probably should have ended sooner.
The real terms cuts in pay for nurses were small because inflation was low. The substantial real terms cuts of the last year are more than that entire parliament.
To be fair to you, how are you defining nurse, as they unlikely to all receive the same pay and less paid may not have received the full one fifth cut? But then the talent drain might even be more acute further up, as why take on more managerial stress if your pay don’t really compensate it?
NHS website shows nurse salaries as going up to £114K, so does not seem shabby at the top but assume most are down the scale a long way. Though I suspect anyone on £30K+ outside London is a decent salary and guaranteed job for life with pension. Tough job for some but not all will be at the coal face.
Although it’s buried in the depths of the report, this is a remarkable statistic:
In 2012 coal produced 43% of electricity.
In 2022 it was 1.5%.
That’s a staggering change in just ten years.
Now, obviously mistakes were made in replacing it. It was very foolish to go for large scale CCGT instead of tidal and to a lesser extent nuclear. But it does rather put into context just how far we’ve come.
Ten years ago this month, [PM] David Cameron…gave a speech at the London headquarters of Bloomberg, a news organisation. In it Mr Cameron outlined his cunning plan to cement Britain’s place in the European Union, by triggering a fundamental reform of the bloc and then offering Britons an in-out referendum on membership. That went well. The 2016 vote to leave the bloc has exacerbated Britain’s economic malaise, gumming up trade and muting investment. It has soured Britain’s relationship with many of its natural allies and weakened the bonds of its own union.
Followed by some reasonably pragmatic suggestions for improving things
Just wondering how that 'fundamental reform of the bloc' bit is going? Could its progress possibly be related to the fact that 'leave' scraped home in the referendum?
Harry’s book is a personal disaster. Forget @Oprah and @netflix, this finishes him in the eyes of @RoyalFamily and mainstream British public. He’s also now a target for every disaffected jihadi or nutter looking to make a name for themselves. His family too. Shocking foolishness.
Harry’s book is a personal disaster. Forget @Oprah and @netflix, this finishes him in the eyes of @RoyalFamily and mainstream British public. He’s also now a target for every disaffected jihadi or nutter looking to make a name for themselves. His family too. Shocking foolishness.
He seems to be “finished in the eyes of the British public” every week since two Easters ago.
In reality, who the fuck cares?
I had a flicker of interest on hearing about the horsey older woman in the pub car park. I’m still not entirely sure if that was actually in the leaked book but I assume for now it was.
Wouldn’t it have been so much better if spare had been a rip roaring yarn about a royal Fitz and the hilarious but risqué scrapes the old blighter had got himself into during his delinquent youth.
The whole Royal family psychodrama just isn’t remotely interesting or relevant.
The media frenzy would disagree with your conclusion. They clearly believe the public find it interesting and relevant.
For a lad who (rightly, in my opinion) despises the tabloid press, he's giving them an absolute shedload of stuff to get their teeth into.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Harry’s book is a personal disaster. Forget @Oprah and @netflix, this finishes him in the eyes of @RoyalFamily and mainstream British public. He’s also now a target for every disaffected jihadi or nutter looking to make a name for themselves. His family too. Shocking foolishness.
The Afghan bodycount business doesn't make him any more of a target than he already was. He was AH-64 gunner (only ever seen him in the front seat, they probably had the closest thing the AAC could muster to an AH-64 expert in the back) so it can't be news that he's brassed up a few dozen of the indigenous. I guess there's even a chance that some of them could have been "taliban" or "terrorists".
Really frustrating that the cold weather isn't mentioned once. Every time there's a cold spell, we get more deaths. It's not rocket science to look at the historic data.
Have been enjoying the shenanigans in Murica with a bbig grin. McCarthy can't carry his party with him, but won't give it up. So we get vote after vote after vote after vote where he makes no progress at all. Meanwhile the Democrat guy stays way out in the lead, but the only thing that would unite the GOP would to vote him down should he accidentally get elected as they squabble.
NornIron decided it didn't want an assembly and keeps voting for knuckle-dragging wazzocks who shut it down. Perhaps the same should be done with the US Congress - just leave it vacant til the next election. Would anyone miss it?
The British industrial designer Tom Karen, behind the designs of the Raleigh Chopper, Marble Run, the Bond Bug 3-wheeler, the Reliant Scimitar, Luke Skywalker's Landspeeder, & the 1982 Popemobile has died age 96: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tom-karen-obituary-shzkgvmrt
According to the New Statesman, CCHQ has given up trying to save the 'red wall', and Sunak has decided to throw everything at the Lib Dems in the 'blue wall'.
If true, this means CCHQ have given up winning 2024 at all.
Really frustrating that the cold weather isn't mentioned once. Every time there's a cold spell, we get more deaths. It's not rocket science to look at the historic data.
Why would you expect the media to be able to understand all the various reasons?
According to the New Statesman, CCHQ has given up trying to save the 'red wall', and Sunak has decided to throw everything at the Lib Dems in the 'blue wall'.
If true, this means CCHQ have given up winning 2024 at all.
According to the New Statesman, CCHQ has given up trying to save the 'red wall', and Sunak has decided to throw everything at the Lib Dems in the 'blue wall'.
If true, this means CCHQ have given up winning 2024 at all.
If reports are accurate, McCarthy is on verge of selling out the country to a nihilist faction so he can briefly occupy a now-powerless office - then cash in for whatever he can get after this fiasco. https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1611127360761352199
Harry’s book is a personal disaster. Forget @Oprah and @netflix, this finishes him in the eyes of @RoyalFamily and mainstream British public. He’s also now a target for every disaffected jihadi or nutter looking to make a name for themselves. His family too. Shocking foolishness.
He seems to be “finished in the eyes of the British public” every week since two Easters ago.
In reality, who the fuck cares?
I had a flicker of interest on hearing about the horsey older woman in the pub car park. I’m still not entirely sure if that was actually in the leaked book but I assume for now it was.
Wouldn’t it have been so much better if spare had been a rip roaring yarn about a royal Fitz and the hilarious but risqué scrapes the old blighter had got himself into during his delinquent youth.
The whole Royal family psychodrama just isn’t remotely interesting or relevant.
I’m trying to remember the soap on Sky, I think, about a fictional Premier League football team.
My old flat mate watched it - said that it was more realistic and had better characters in it than the real thing…
Harry’s book is a personal disaster. Forget @Oprah and @netflix, this finishes him in the eyes of @RoyalFamily and mainstream British public. He’s also now a target for every disaffected jihadi or nutter looking to make a name for themselves. His family too. Shocking foolishness.
He seems to be “finished in the eyes of the British public” every week since two Easters ago.
In reality, who the fuck cares?
I had a flicker of interest on hearing about the horsey older woman in the pub car park. I’m still not entirely sure if that was actually in the leaked book but I assume for now it was.
Wouldn’t it have been so much better if spare had been a rip roaring yarn about a royal Fitz and the hilarious but risqué scrapes the old blighter had got himself into during his delinquent youth.
The whole Royal family psychodrama just isn’t remotely interesting or relevant.
I’m trying to remember the soap on Sky, I think, about a fictional Premier League football team.
My old flat mate watched it - said that it was more realistic and had better characters in it than the real thing…
According to the New Statesman, CCHQ has given up trying to save the 'red wall', and Sunak has decided to throw everything at the Lib Dems in the 'blue wall'.
If true, this means CCHQ have given up winning 2024 at all.
According to the New Statesman, CCHQ has given up trying to save the 'red wall', and Sunak has decided to throw everything at the Lib Dems in the 'blue wall'.
If true, this means CCHQ have given up winning 2024 at all.
According to the New Statesman, CCHQ has given up trying to save the 'red wall', and Sunak has decided to throw everything at the Lib Dems in the 'blue wall'.
If true, this means CCHQ have given up winning 2024 at all.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
If reports are accurate, McCarthy is on verge of selling out the country to a nihilist faction so he can briefly occupy a now-powerless office - then cash in for whatever he can get after this fiasco. https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1611127360761352199
A Weakership.
If Trump's nomination goes anywhere, it becomes a Wankership.
While waiting for this evening's local elections results I have been scouring the web for forgotten music gems. Can I present Karl Goldmark. I was aware of his violin concerto but now know about his enigmatic overture Penthesilea and his magnificent opera Die Konigen von Saba ( with a superb alternative Entry of the Queen of Sheba). Check it out.
I had never heard of him, but sounds interesting. Will seek out the Milstein recording of the violin concerto. Thanks for the pointer.
"he’ll be 82 before the first primaries – is not a negative factor."
Does it indicate that? He's an incumbent president who has just had an okay (as opposed to the more usual bad or disastrous) round of midterm elections. If he were 72 instead of 82 then he'd likely be higher than 63%.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
Mike is not one to change his mind readily but I do wish he would at least listen to my previous points, reinforced by others, about the difference in attitudes to age in the UK vs the US.
"Retirement at 60" just isn't a thing for fit, healthy, driven Americans who believe in the Dream. You work and you work and you work. Senators in their 80's and 90's are not unknown and one, Strom Thurmond, did not retire as a Senator until he passed 100 as recently as 2003.
Unthinkable in the UK. De Rigueur in the US.
Here's a list of the 10 oldest serving senators. There are several currently serving senators in their late 80's.
Much will depend on the individual, but I have been dealing with people in business who keep going in to their 80s... and fair play to them, but it can get quite frustrating dealing with them; firstly, you feel obliged to be a lot more deferential than you would otherwise be. Secondly, sometimes they don't know when to stop and keep going long after they should have called it a day, and it hinders succession planning. Clearly this is a factor in US politics but I don't think that this is a particularly great state of affairs.
At 72 I do notice the "deferential" thing, even from (younger) people in more senior positions, and I find it unnerving. If someone doesn't agree with something I do or say, i want them to tell me with the usual level of office politeness - not "That's bollocks", but "I don't agree about that, I think..." If they merely look dubious, eye me with concern but say nothing, it feels patronising. Moreover, I presume there will come a point (whether in 10 years or 20) where my mind is inadequate for the job, and then I want to be told, a la Montgomery, that I don't seem to be up to it, how about a lovely retirement? I won't like it but I don't want to be a passenger, ever.
Conversely, of course, if my mind is still fit I don't want to be told I need to retire because X years have passed since I was born. That's just silly (and illegal). I think we should judge Biden on what he is, rather than when he was born.
Tempted to say that's bollocks, Nick. But actually I can't find fault with any of it.
Although it’s buried in the depths of the report, this is a remarkable statistic:
In 2012 coal produced 43% of electricity.
In 2022 it was 1.5%.
That’s a staggering change in just ten years.
Now, obviously mistakes were made in replacing it. It was very foolish to go for large scale CCGT instead of tidal and to a lesser extent nuclear. But it does rather put into context just how far we’ve come.
And lets not forget that three of the coal-fired units at Drax now burn old-growth Canadian forests, and we can all pretend that the resultant CO2 emissions do not exist.
If reports are accurate, McCarthy is on verge of selling out the country to a nihilist faction so he can briefly occupy a now-powerless office - then cash in for whatever he can get after this fiasco. https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1611127360761352199
A Weakership.
If Trump's nomination goes anywhere, it becomes a Wankership.
McCarthy looks like a man under pressure - he'll be giving away everything shortly... I'd be keeping the pressure right up if I was in the awkward squad.
After living here a year, I still don’t understand US politics.
And I can’t be arsed to even look it up.
It’s a giant mess.
UK politics, for all its squalid spectacle, seems both straightforward and redeemable somehow.
So I stay on here instead of PB_USA.com
I literally lived on Capitol Hill for five years and even then I couldn't get my head around it.
Interesting - were you in a political job?
No, an economist role. My wife worked as a lobbyist (for a human right organisation) but mainly we just lived on Capitol Hill because it's a really nice neighbourhood that was recommended to us by friends of friends who lived there when we moved to DC and were looking for somewhere to live.
According to the New Statesman, CCHQ has given up trying to save the 'red wall', and Sunak has decided to throw everything at the Lib Dems in the 'blue wall'.
If true, this means CCHQ have given up winning 2024 at all.
To put it rather differently, there is no path to a majority by targeting only the Liberal Democrats.
2015 waves and says hello.
Alright Mr Picky, there is *now* no path to a majority by targeting only the Liberal Democrats.
There is by targeting the SNP however for Labour.
On Sunak's part the polling shows he is more popular than Boris in the bluewall but less popular than Boris in the redwall. So it makes sense for Sunak to try and eke out a Theresa May 2017 style result in a hung parliament by holding the bluewall and at least still win most seats, even if he has conceded he will lose the Conservative majority and lose the redwall seats Boris won
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I can see this issue is going to be a major battlefield once the rejoin campaign starts. As I've said previously, as someone who doesn't want us to join the euro in the foreseeable future, the legal commitment to join at some point - with the option to defer indefinitely - doesn't keep me awake at night.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I can see this issue is going to be a major battlefield once the rejoin campaign starts. As I've said previously, as someone who doesn't want us to join the euro in the foreseeable future, the legal commitment to join at some point - with the option to defer indefinitely - doesn't keep me awake at night.
But to be fair you are already -as I understand it - a fairly committed rejoiner. The question is how that plays with the luke warm remainers from 2016 and with the leavers who are now looking at rejoin.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I can see this issue is going to be a major battlefield once the rejoin campaign starts. As I've said previously, as someone who doesn't want us to join the euro in the foreseeable future, the legal commitment to join at some point - with the option to defer indefinitely - doesn't keep me awake at night.
You're very optimistic if you think we'll be offered that. The EU will not take any risks on us leaving for a second time, and the best way for them to ensure that is for us to join the euro on day one of membership.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
One observation I would make about "the long term" and the Euro... My daughter, at age 9, has zero attachment to "the pound" - she doesn't have any physical currency (she has a kid's card from Rooster), and all her spending is done using numbers.
So, leaving aside economics (which are of course a vital part of the debate) I suspect that in 10-15 years time, there will be a whole generation who have no visceral connection to "the pound". And that will take a lot of the sting out of the emotional side of the argument.
Just 3% lead for Rejoin then if it is pointed out that means joining Schengen and free movement restored. That is even assuming we kept our Eurozone opt out
My issue has nothing to do with the BBC's politics. My issue is with the relevance and popularity of much of its programming, and it's poor commercial performance given the vast advantage its funding via the license fee ensures.
What's the point of having a publicly funded broadcaster and then measuring it by commercial performance? If you want 'commercially successful' you can get that from the commercially funded channels; if you're publicly funding TV it should be because you want an outcome you're not getting from the commercial channels, and your metrics should therefore be measuring whatever that other outcome is.
I am not against public funding for a heartbeat of highbrow or otherwise essential public service programming that would otherwise not be made, but much of the BBC's output doesn't fit that profile, it's popular entertainment, just not very entertaining, or as it turns out very popular.
I am also not proposing to privatise the BBC (and I am against privatising Channel 4) but I do believe that with the investment it receives, it should at some point aim to be making money not just using it up.
“I am against privatising Channel 4”
Don’t you feel it survived privatisation by living on past glories, sentimentality not it’s output today, nor it’s hopeless future of dishing out unoriginal stuff just easily now found everywhere else.
When it was born there were only four channels, and the community remit, to provide access to something different, was 100% real then, but 0% real now. What’s point of C4 foreign film/LGBT season when you can have all that from any or all options on Netflix, Sky Cinema, Prime, MUBI. What is original now on C4 - when so many other places are being more original with better budgets?
Privatisation isn’t the answer - it should be retired, put to sleep, whilst at birth it was 100% relevant, it’s now 0% relevant.
This is no country for unoriginal old channels, whether paid by tax payers or not.
It's an old, unoriginal channel that makes a profit, and is largely responsible for funding the UK film industry. Why are we in such a rush to get rid of the parts of the State (see also Royal Mail privatisation) that actually run at a profit?
The measurement of nationalised company’s is simply if they are making profit?
Does a nationalised rail have to run a profit to save itself from privatisation - or fulfil its remit of providing a service to the country - get people to work and business on time for the productivity of the nation?
I explained a tax payer funded Channel 4 is 0% fulfilling its remit these days, in that case why is it getting largess from the tax payer? They should only get tax payer cash for achieving remit, not claiming profit...
It doesn't take taxpayer money, being funded from advertising.
Although it’s buried in the depths of the report, this is a remarkable statistic:
In 2012 coal produced 43% of electricity.
In 2022 it was 1.5%.
That’s a staggering change in just ten years.
Now, obviously mistakes were made in replacing it. It was very foolish to go for large scale CCGT instead of tidal and to a lesser extent nuclear. But it does rather put into context just how far we’ve come.
And lets not forget that three of the coal-fired units at Drax now burn old-growth Canadian forests, and we can all pretend that the resultant CO2 emissions do not exist.
We should be burning coal in them. And there should (and I think will) be new clean coal power stations burning our own coal in the next 10 years. We sit on vast energy resources - it's taking a lot of effort from a lot of people to keep us in the shit situation we're in presently.
According to the New Statesman, CCHQ has given up trying to save the 'red wall', and Sunak has decided to throw everything at the Lib Dems in the 'blue wall'.
If true, this means CCHQ have given up winning 2024 at all.
To put it rather differently, there is no path to a majority by targeting only the Liberal Democrats.
2015 waves and says hello.
Alright Mr Picky, there is *now* no path to a majority by targeting only the Liberal Democrats.
There is by targeting the SNP however for Labour.
On Sunak's part the polling shows he is more popular than Boris in the bluewall but less popular than Boris in the redwall. So it makes sense for Sunak to try and eke out a Theresa May 2017 style result in a hung parliament by holding the bluewall and at least still win most seats, even if he has conceded he will lose the Conservative majority and lose the redwall seats Boris won
It is in Labour's interest for the SNP to Hoover up the remaining Tory seats in Scotland.
After living here a year, I still don’t understand US politics.
And I can’t be arsed to even look it up.
It’s a giant mess.
UK politics, for all its squalid spectacle, seems both straightforward and redeemable somehow.
So I stay on here instead of PB_USA.com
Does such a thing even exist?
Predictit comments Below the line
Full of this sort of comment:
BitterC King Von an hour ago
The baseless Climate Hoax is driving energy prices which are the biggest component of today's inflation as an add on to the unscience based shutdowns, etc reaction to the bad flu we saw in 2020, which was bio engineered in ChyNah in partnership with the USA and released to keep Trump from a 2nd term.
OBiden's open borders are a gift that will keep on giving for decades here, btw. 5 million illiterate 3rd worlders and climbing.
The climate hoax is also driving food scarcity worldwide...be it lack of fertilizers, taking farmland out of production, or driving ridiculous livestock policies.
The surveillance state is complete and JObama's misadministration is normalizing its usage.
I could go on about the rules/regs that have the force of law that the administrative state are implementing right under your nose.
I bet you think that it is not just OK but NECESSARY that Big Brother protect us against so-called disinformation
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I can see this issue is going to be a major battlefield once the rejoin campaign starts. As I've said previously, as someone who doesn't want us to join the euro in the foreseeable future, the legal commitment to join at some point - with the option to defer indefinitely - doesn't keep me awake at night.
In a way it's all moot, nobody is going to push rejoin in 2024 and it would be a massive mistake to do so. The unpleasantness is still too raw and recent.
However, we were told that the threat of freedom of movement, Schengen and paying in to the Eurobudget would be enough to keep us out. Whilst they have an effect (and I'm sure that the currency thing would as well) it's surprisingly small. Surprising to me, anyway.
Just 3% lead for Rejoin then if it is pointed out that means joining Schengen and free movement restored. That is even assuming we kept our Eurozone opt out
Personally, I find that an extraordinarily high number. I guess that's because I am a "shouldn't have left, not practical to re-join for a good long while" and I was expecting my view to be more common.
Just 3% lead for Rejoin then if it is pointed out that means joining Schengen and free movement restored. That is even assuming we kept our Eurozone opt out
The main takeaway from the poll is surely that the Brexiteers have done a terrible job in demonstrating the positive case for Brexit. They need some visible, demonstrable and perceptible wins, and quickly, if they want to avoid the UK and the EU getting a whole lot closer.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
One observation I would make about "the long term" and the Euro... My daughter, at age 9, has zero attachment to "the pound" - she doesn't have any physical currency (she has a kid's card from Rooster), and all her spending is done using numbers.
So, leaving aside economics (which are of course a vital part of the debate) I suspect that in 10-15 years time, there will be a whole generation who have no visceral connection to "the pound". And that will take a lot of the sting out of the emotional side of the argument.
I disagree. It is not actually about 'the pound'. It is about control of ones economy. People are not as dumb as many try to paint them and they get that argument.
My issue has nothing to do with the BBC's politics. My issue is with the relevance and popularity of much of its programming, and it's poor commercial performance given the vast advantage its funding via the license fee ensures.
What's the point of having a publicly funded broadcaster and then measuring it by commercial performance? If you want 'commercially successful' you can get that from the commercially funded channels; if you're publicly funding TV it should be because you want an outcome you're not getting from the commercial channels, and your metrics should therefore be measuring whatever that other outcome is.
I am not against public funding for a heartbeat of highbrow or otherwise essential public service programming that would otherwise not be made, but much of the BBC's output doesn't fit that profile, it's popular entertainment, just not very entertaining, or as it turns out very popular.
I am also not proposing to privatise the BBC (and I am against privatising Channel 4) but I do believe that with the investment it receives, it should at some point aim to be making money not just using it up.
“I am against privatising Channel 4”
Don’t you feel it survived privatisation by living on past glories, sentimentality not it’s output today, nor it’s hopeless future of dishing out unoriginal stuff just easily now found everywhere else.
When it was born there were only four channels, and the community remit, to provide access to something different, was 100% real then, but 0% real now. What’s point of C4 foreign film/LGBT season when you can have all that from any or all options on Netflix, Sky Cinema, Prime, MUBI. What is original now on C4 - when so many other places are being more original with better budgets?
Privatisation isn’t the answer - it should be retired, put to sleep, whilst at birth it was 100% relevant, it’s now 0% relevant.
This is no country for unoriginal old channels, whether paid by tax payers or not.
It's an old, unoriginal channel that makes a profit, and is largely responsible for funding the UK film industry. Why are we in such a rush to get rid of the parts of the State (see also Royal Mail privatisation) that actually run at a profit?
The measurement of nationalised company’s is simply if they are making profit?
Does a nationalised rail have to run a profit to save itself from privatisation - or fulfil its remit of providing a service to the country - get people to work and business on time for the productivity of the nation?
I explained a tax payer funded Channel 4 is 0% fulfilling its remit these days, in that case why is it getting largess from the tax payer? They should only get tax payer cash for achieving remit, not claiming profit...
It doesn't take taxpayer money, being funded from advertising.
It just goes to show that being completely off your brief and eviscerated by a commons committee doesn't mean that your message won't land.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I also expect Article 52 to be closed off to the UK too. Perhaps a "clarification" saying that EU members only have a single chance to use it. And we've used it. The EU is not going to go through the grief of letting us back in, only to flounce off again in a decade.
If reports are accurate, McCarthy is on verge of selling out the country to a nihilist faction so he can briefly occupy a now-powerless office - then cash in for whatever he can get after this fiasco. https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1611127360761352199
A Weakership.
If Trump's nomination goes anywhere, it becomes a Wankership.
And if McCarthy gets in by just a single vote, it would be a Squeakership.
After living here a year, I still don’t understand US politics.
And I can’t be arsed to even look it up.
It’s a giant mess.
UK politics, for all its squalid spectacle, seems both straightforward and redeemable somehow.
So I stay on here instead of PB_USA.com
Does such a thing even exist?
Predictit comments Below the line
Full of this sort of comment:
BitterC King Von an hour ago
The baseless Climate Hoax is driving energy prices which are the biggest component of today's inflation as an add on to the unscience based shutdowns, etc reaction to the bad flu we saw in 2020, which was bio engineered in ChyNah in partnership with the USA and released to keep Trump from a 2nd term.
OBiden's open borders are a gift that will keep on giving for decades here, btw. 5 million illiterate 3rd worlders and climbing.
The climate hoax is also driving food scarcity worldwide...be it lack of fertilizers, taking farmland out of production, or driving ridiculous livestock policies.
The surveillance state is complete and JObama's misadministration is normalizing its usage.
I could go on about the rules/regs that have the force of law that the administrative state are implementing right under your nose.
I bet you think that it is not just OK but NECESSARY that Big Brother protect us against so-called disinformation
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I also expect Article 52 to be closed off to the UK too. Perhaps a "clarification" saying that EU members only have a single chance to use it. And we've used it. The EU is not going to go through the grief of letting us back in, only to flounce off again in a decade.
Rejoin means in forever.
I'm not sure that in that circumstance anyone is going to be particularly concerned with the rules for interpretation of the EU Charter?
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
One observation I would make about "the long term" and the Euro... My daughter, at age 9, has zero attachment to "the pound" - she doesn't have any physical currency (she has a kid's card from Rooster), and all her spending is done using numbers.
So, leaving aside economics (which are of course a vital part of the debate) I suspect that in 10-15 years time, there will be a whole generation who have no visceral connection to "the pound". And that will take a lot of the sting out of the emotional side of the argument.
I disagree. It is not actually about 'the pound'. It is about control of ones economy. People are not as dumb as many try to paint them and they get that argument.
As I say - the economics are a vital part of the debate. But the economics are inevitably coloured by the emotional - we are neither dumb, yet nor are we robotic decision machines. Those emotions are central to how we assess risk. Does this feel "we" or "not we"?
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I also expect Article 52 to be closed off to the UK too. Perhaps a "clarification" saying that EU members only have a single chance to use it. And we've used it. The EU is not going to go through the grief of letting us back in, only to flounce off again in a decade.
Rejoin means in forever.
Do you mean Article 50? 52 is some pompous gibberish relating to rights and legislatures.
Just 3% lead for Rejoin then if it is pointed out that means joining Schengen and free movement restored. That is even assuming we kept our Eurozone opt out
The main takeaway from the poll is surely that the Brexiteers have done a terrible job in demonstrating the positive case for Brexit. They need some visible, demonstrable and perceptible wins, and quickly, if they want to avoid the UK and the EU getting a whole lot closer.
The Leavers' post-Brexit delivery has been the only thing worse than the Remainers' campaign to stay in.
If reports are accurate, McCarthy is on verge of selling out the country to a nihilist faction so he can briefly occupy a now-powerless office - then cash in for whatever he can get after this fiasco. https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1611127360761352199
A Weakership.
If Trump's nomination goes anywhere, it becomes a Wankership.
And if McCarthy gets in by just a single vote, it would be a Squeakership.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
One observation I would make about "the long term" and the Euro... My daughter, at age 9, has zero attachment to "the pound" - she doesn't have any physical currency (she has a kid's card from Rooster), and all her spending is done using numbers.
So, leaving aside economics (which are of course a vital part of the debate) I suspect that in 10-15 years time, there will be a whole generation who have no visceral connection to "the pound". And that will take a lot of the sting out of the emotional side of the argument.
Very good point. Like someone getting outraged because a particular shop doesn't take cheques.
Edit: for those under a certain age, "cheques" were pieces of paper, which...
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
One observation I would make about "the long term" and the Euro... My daughter, at age 9, has zero attachment to "the pound" - she doesn't have any physical currency (she has a kid's card from Rooster), and all her spending is done using numbers.
So, leaving aside economics (which are of course a vital part of the debate) I suspect that in 10-15 years time, there will be a whole generation who have no visceral connection to "the pound". And that will take a lot of the sting out of the emotional side of the argument.
I disagree. It is not actually about 'the pound'. It is about control of ones economy. People are not as dumb as many try to paint them and they get that argument.
Most folk will look at our economic performance relative to Europe. Should it continue to be poor, then such 'control' might be thought relatively unimportant. Dumb or not, electorates tend to be fickle.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I also expect Article 52 to be closed off to the UK too. Perhaps a "clarification" saying that EU members only have a single chance to use it. And we've used it. The EU is not going to go through the grief of letting us back in, only to flounce off again in a decade.
Rejoin means in forever.
Nothing is forever. You mean rejoin would be for the remainder of your life, which it might well be. But not forever. Where's your vision, man; the world doesn't revolve around you.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I also expect Article 52 to be closed off to the UK too. Perhaps a "clarification" saying that EU members only have a single chance to use it. And we've used it. The EU is not going to go through the grief of letting us back in, only to flounce off again in a decade.
Rejoin means in forever.
Do you mean Article 50? 52 is some pompous gibberish relating to rights and legislatures.
Just 3% lead for Rejoin then if it is pointed out that means joining Schengen and free movement restored. That is even assuming we kept our Eurozone opt out
The main takeaway from the poll is surely that the Brexiteers have done a terrible job in demonstrating the positive case for Brexit. They need some visible, demonstrable and perceptible wins, and quickly, if they want to avoid the UK and the EU getting a whole lot closer.
The Leavers' post-Brexit delivery has been the only thing worse than the Remainers' campaign to stay in.
I think you're a bit generous to the new maths GCSE there.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I can see this issue is going to be a major battlefield once the rejoin campaign starts. As I've said previously, as someone who doesn't want us to join the euro in the foreseeable future, the legal commitment to join at some point - with the option to defer indefinitely - doesn't keep me awake at night.
In a way it's all moot, nobody is going to push rejoin in 2024 and it would be a massive mistake to do so. The unpleasantness is still too raw and recent.
However, we were told that the threat of freedom of movement, Schengen and paying in to the Eurobudget would be enough to keep us out. Whilst they have an effect (and I'm sure that the currency thing would as well) it's surprisingly small. Surprising to me, anyway.
I think it is a mistake on all sides for people to underestimate the link between the popularity or otherwise of the Government/current issues and the Brexit/Rejoin question. I obviously stand to be wrong but I would predict that after a couple of years of the Tories being out of Government and things improving (I hope) under Starmer, that the dissatisfaction with our position outside the EU would ease. All the more so if Starmer does some of the sensible, non ideological things that are available to him to improve relations with the EU. This is why I have no great fears about the UK rejoining the EU any time soon. Starmer is not daft enough to try it yet and the longer he leaves it the less likely it is to happen.
Just 3% lead for Rejoin then if it is pointed out that means joining Schengen and free movement restored. That is even assuming we kept our Eurozone opt out
Is the difference between 33% and 35% (or between 42% and 38%) statistically significant? Do you know what the sample size is?
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I also expect Article 52 to be closed off to the UK too. Perhaps a "clarification" saying that EU members only have a single chance to use it. And we've used it. The EU is not going to go through the grief of letting us back in, only to flounce off again in a decade.
Rejoin means in forever.
Do you mean Article 50? 52 is some pompous gibberish relating to rights and legislatures.
Yet with astoundingly high resale/collectors' value. I'm always mildly surprised by how much the nostalgia industry (one area that is enjoying exponential growth) operates around things that were actually a bit shit.
Did you quote the wrong post there TUD, or am I just not seeing the connection?
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I also expect Article 52 to be closed off to the UK too. Perhaps a "clarification" saying that EU members only have a single chance to use it. And we've used it. The EU is not going to go through the grief of letting us back in, only to flounce off again in a decade.
Rejoin means in forever.
Do you mean Article 50? 52 is some pompous gibberish relating to rights and legislatures.
Raleigh Chopper, Marble Run, the Bond Bug 3-wheeler, the Reliant Scimitar, Luke Skywalker's Landspeeder, & the 1982 Popemobile
That's an appalling CV. Basically a list of things that should never have existed.
I had a Chopper as a kid. Shocking thing.
Yet with astoundingly high resale/collectors' values. I'm always mildly surprised by how much the nostalgia industry (one area that is enjoying exponential growth) revolves around things that were actually a bit shit.
New YouGov just published … Labour 48 Tory 24 LibDems 9 Reform 8 Greens 6 SNP 4 Polling conducted 4th and 5th January
That and Techne's almost identical results suggest that Sunak's speech (which as I said here I thought was quite good) had no effect.
If I were a Red Wall Tory in particular I would put some serious thought into either defection or a new career. Even standing as a sitting Tory in a marginal Northern seat feels like a waste of energy.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I can see this issue is going to be a major battlefield once the rejoin campaign starts. As I've said previously, as someone who doesn't want us to join the euro in the foreseeable future, the legal commitment to join at some point - with the option to defer indefinitely - doesn't keep me awake at night.
In a way it's all moot, nobody is going to push rejoin in 2024 and it would be a massive mistake to do so. The unpleasantness is still too raw and recent.
However, we were told that the threat of freedom of movement, Schengen and paying in to the Eurobudget would be enough to keep us out. Whilst they have an effect (and I'm sure that the currency thing would as well) it's surprisingly small. Surprising to me, anyway.
I think it is a mistake on all sides for people to underestimate the link between the popularity or otherwise of the Government/current issues and the Brexit/Rejoin question. I obviously stand to be wrong but I would predict that after a couple of years of the Tories being out of Government and things improving (I hope) under Starmer, that the dissatisfaction with our position outside the EU would ease. All the more so if Starmer does some of the sensible, non ideological things that are available to him to improve relations with the EU. This is why I have no great fears about the UK rejoining the EU any time soon. Starmer is not daft enough to try it yet and the longer he leaves it the less likely it is to happen.
I think this is right and of course you have answered the question of why we left in the first place. People were dissatisfied with their (economic) life in general and frustrated about their own prospects and the dog they decided to kick was the EU. Nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of the UK being in the EU just that it was to hand.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I also expect Article 52 to be closed off to the UK too. Perhaps a "clarification" saying that EU members only have a single chance to use it. And we've used it. The EU is not going to go through the grief of letting us back in, only to flounce off again in a decade.
Rejoin means in forever.
Do you mean Article 50? 52 is some pompous gibberish relating to rights and legislatures.
Yet with astoundingly high resale/collectors' value. I'm always mildly surprised by how much the nostalgia industry (one area that is enjoying exponential growth) operates around things that were actually a bit shit.
Did you quote the wrong post there TUD, or am I just not seeing the connection?
I did, now corrected, though feel free to make use of 'a bit shit' in the point you were making.
Although it’s buried in the depths of the report, this is a remarkable statistic:
In 2012 coal produced 43% of electricity.
In 2022 it was 1.5%.
That’s a staggering change in just ten years.
Now, obviously mistakes were made in replacing it. It was very foolish to go for large scale CCGT instead of tidal and to a lesser extent nuclear. But it does rather put into context just how far we’ve come.
And lets not forget that three of the coal-fired units at Drax now burn old-growth Canadian forests, and we can all pretend that the resultant CO2 emissions do not exist.
We should be burning coal in them. And there should (and I think will) be new clean coal power stations burning our own coal in the next 10 years. We sit on vast energy resources - it's taking a lot of effort from a lot of people to keep us in the shit situation we're in presently.
There were proposals for clean coal plants in the first and second carbon capture competitions and in the EU NER300 carbon capture process. In the end, the UK Government decided not to support any of them. In the current CCS, there are no coal-based projects - I'm not sure if they were even eligible (illegible) to apply.
In addition, Underground Coal Gasification was killed off. That could have allowed coal resources further out under the North Sea to be developed, with pre-combustion carbon capture on the syngas produced to make it low carbon.
So I don't think your prediction of clean coal plants in the UK will happen.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I also expect Article 52 to be closed off to the UK too. Perhaps a "clarification" saying that EU members only have a single chance to use it. And we've used it. The EU is not going to go through the grief of letting us back in, only to flounce off again in a decade.
Rejoin means in forever.
Do you mean Article 50? 52 is some pompous gibberish relating to rights and legislatures.
Yet with astoundingly high resale/collectors' value. I'm always mildly surprised by how much the nostalgia industry (one area that is enjoying exponential growth) operates around things that were actually a bit shit.
Did you quote the wrong post there TUD, or am I just not seeing the connection?
I did, now corrected, though feel free to make use of 'a bit shit' in the point you were making.
Well the Lisbon Treaty is bit shit. I think most people would agree it's a joke of a document. But I was surprised to see you describe nostalgia for the EU that way!
Just 3% lead for Rejoin then if it is pointed out that means joining Schengen and free movement restored. That is even assuming we kept our Eurozone opt out
The main takeaway from the poll is surely that the Brexiteers have done a terrible job in demonstrating the positive case for Brexit. They need some visible, demonstrable and perceptible wins, and quickly, if they want to avoid the UK and the EU getting a whole lot closer.
They have, ending free movement. That is what the redwall voted for and even Starmer now will not restore it.
As soon as restoring that is mentioned the rejoin lead collapses to almost nothing
New YouGov just published … Labour 48 Tory 24 LibDems 9 Reform 8 Greens 6 SNP 4 Polling conducted 4th and 5th January
That and Techne's almost identical results suggest that Sunak's speech (which as I said here I thought was quite good) had no effect.
If I were a Red Wall Tory in particular I would put some serious thought into either defection or a new career. Even standing as a sitting Tory in a marginal Northern seat feels like a waste of energy.
I defer to your greater wisdom of how this all works Nick, but I’d have thought for some especially ambitious ones it would help to go down fighting and then casting around for a winnable (hopefully) seat in 2028/2029 or whenever the next election comes?
The sad thing about the Tories’ disastrous parliament is that a lot of the new Northern MPs who genuinely had something different to bring to the table and could have articulated a new generation of conservatism are just going to be swept away. They could have been the future leaders and I would hope that they are able to stay in and help reshape the party in opposition, whatever role they occupy
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I can see this issue is going to be a major battlefield once the rejoin campaign starts. As I've said previously, as someone who doesn't want us to join the euro in the foreseeable future, the legal commitment to join at some point - with the option to defer indefinitely - doesn't keep me awake at night.
You're very optimistic if you think we'll be offered that. The EU will not take any risks on us leaving for a second time, and the best way for them to ensure that is for us to join the euro on day one of membership.
That is impossible under the rules governing euro membership. These rules are designed to ensure that the euro isn't compromised by economies joining before they are ready. I actually think the EU will be quite wary of us joining the Euro given how we crashed out of the ERM. Protecting the Euro is much more important to the EU than stopping us leaving, they're not going to endanger the former in pursuit of the latter.
According to the New Statesman, CCHQ has given up trying to save the 'red wall', and Sunak has decided to throw everything at the Lib Dems in the 'blue wall'.
If true, this means CCHQ have given up winning 2024 at all.
To put it rather differently, there is no path to a majority by targeting only the Liberal Democrats.
2015 waves and says hello.
Alright Mr Picky, there is *now* no path to a majority by targeting only the Liberal Democrats.
There is by targeting the SNP however for Labour.
On Sunak's part the polling shows he is more popular than Boris in the bluewall but less popular than Boris in the redwall. So it makes sense for Sunak to try and eke out a Theresa May 2017 style result in a hung parliament by holding the bluewall and at least still win most seats, even if he has conceded he will lose the Conservative majority and lose the redwall seats Boris won
It is in Labour's interest for the SNP to Hoover up the remaining Tory seats in Scotland.
Minimising Tory seats is our first priority.
No it isn't, for starters there are only 6 Tory seats left in Scotland.
If there is any Tory recovery at all by the next election then if Labour fails to win SNP seats then it will almost certainly mean Starmer fails to get a majority
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I can see this issue is going to be a major battlefield once the rejoin campaign starts. As I've said previously, as someone who doesn't want us to join the euro in the foreseeable future, the legal commitment to join at some point - with the option to defer indefinitely - doesn't keep me awake at night.
In a way it's all moot, nobody is going to push rejoin in 2024 and it would be a massive mistake to do so. The unpleasantness is still too raw and recent.
However, we were told that the threat of freedom of movement, Schengen and paying in to the Eurobudget would be enough to keep us out. Whilst they have an effect (and I'm sure that the currency thing would as well) it's surprisingly small. Surprising to me, anyway.
I think it is a mistake on all sides for people to underestimate the link between the popularity or otherwise of the Government/current issues and the Brexit/Rejoin question. I obviously stand to be wrong but I would predict that after a couple of years of the Tories being out of Government and things improving (I hope) under Starmer, that the dissatisfaction with our position outside the EU would ease. All the more so if Starmer does some of the sensible, non ideological things that are available to him to improve relations with the EU. This is why I have no great fears about the UK rejoining the EU any time soon. Starmer is not daft enough to try it yet and the longer he leaves it the less likely it is to happen.
I think this is right and of course you have answered the question of why we left in the first place. People were dissatisfied with their (economic) life in general and frustrated about their own prospects and the dog they decided to kick was the EU. Nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of the UK being in the EU just that it was to hand.
Relative economic performance of the next decade will decide whether or not it stays a live issue, I think. If we prosper, then rejoin will likely go nowhere; if we don't, its support will grow.
In the latter circumstances, it's too tempting not to be weaponised by a party leader, even if they're not as devoid of principle as was Boris.
The briefing on their methodology is unusually comprehensive and worth a read - seems fairly standard, though. Oddly, their tables don't have a geographical split, but Labour vote differences by age and education are less marked than in the past - Labour leads in all age groups with 40-55% of the vote, and all educational groups except "primary school only" (presumably the very elderly), by 44 to 49%. Tories do less badly among the elderly, and reform has overtaken the LibDems in that group. The biggest effect of party preference is Brexit vote, with Tories still ahead by 33 to 18 among Leavers.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I can see this issue is going to be a major battlefield once the rejoin campaign starts. As I've said previously, as someone who doesn't want us to join the euro in the foreseeable future, the legal commitment to join at some point - with the option to defer indefinitely - doesn't keep me awake at night.
But to be fair you are already -as I understand it - a fairly committed rejoiner. The question is how that plays with the luke warm remainers from 2016 and with the leavers who are now looking at rejoin.
Yes that's true. Fwiw I am not in a massive hurry to rejoin, I wouldn't want to do it until there was a really clear majority in favour. Although in my opinion our economic prospects are being harmed every day we are outside the EU, the last thing we need is another divisive campaign on this issue.
Just 3% lead for Rejoin then if it is pointed out that means joining Schengen and free movement restored. That is even assuming we kept our Eurozone opt out
This is like the Yes Prime Minister episode where they slant the question to get the answer they want (see question which has a lot more in it than the extract you have given) and still rejoin leads. I have to say I'm surprised by that.
New YouGov just published … Labour 48 Tory 24 LibDems 9 Reform 8 Greens 6 SNP 4 Polling conducted 4th and 5th January
That and Techne's almost identical results suggest that Sunak's speech (which as I said here I thought was quite good) had no effect.
If I were a Red Wall Tory in particular I would put some serious thought into either defection or a new career. Even standing as a sitting Tory in a marginal Northern seat feels like a waste of energy.
I defer to your greater wisdom of how this all works Nick, but I’d have thought for some especially ambitious ones it would help to go down fighting and then casting around for a winnable (hopefully) seat in 2028/2029 or whenever the next election comes?
The sad thing about the Tories’ disastrous parliament is that a lot of the new Northern MPs who genuinely had something different to bring to the table and could have articulated a new generation of conservatism are just going to be swept away. They could have been the future leaders and I would hope that they are able to stay in and help reshape the party in opposition, whatever role they occupy
I dunno about wisdom! But getting hammered in an election is generally a worse recommendation for reselection than doing something else and (maybe) coming back later. It's different from being a first-time candidate - everyone respects you for that regardless of the outcome. But losing badly in a swing against *you* doesn't look good.
Really frustrating that the cold weather isn't mentioned once. Every time there's a cold spell, we get more deaths. It's not rocket science to look at the historic data.
You do understand that excess deaths means deaths over the number expected? And that if there's more deaths every cold spell, then excess deaths now means deaths over the number you'd expect to get in a cold spell? This isn't, as you say, rocket science.
As I've said before on here, my wife is a coroner's officer. I know (because she's told me) that West Sussex has run out of mortuary space, and every hospital has temporary mortuaries built from refrigerated units in place, and most of those are full too. As there's nothing special about Sussex, I expect most other areas are in the same position.
Just 3% lead for Rejoin then if it is pointed out that means joining Schengen and free movement restored. That is even assuming we kept our Eurozone opt out
The main takeaway from the poll is surely that the Brexiteers have done a terrible job in demonstrating the positive case for Brexit. They need some visible, demonstrable and perceptible wins, and quickly, if they want to avoid the UK and the EU getting a whole lot closer.
They have, ending free movement. That is what the redwall voted for and even Starmer now will not restore it.
As soon as restoring that is mentioned the rejoin lead collapses to almost nothing
Managing to keep most of the Leave vote onside on one issue is not the same as demonstrating the positive case for Brexit to the whole country, or even to half of the country. The failure to do that almost inevitably means a much closer relationship further down the line.
Permission to be surprised how small that shift is, Sir?
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
Except they don't list all the downsides. A commitment to join the Euro should be added to that list because even though it is something we might try to delay indefinitely, it would still be a legal commitment.
I can see this issue is going to be a major battlefield once the rejoin campaign starts. As I've said previously, as someone who doesn't want us to join the euro in the foreseeable future, the legal commitment to join at some point - with the option to defer indefinitely - doesn't keep me awake at night.
But to be fair you are already -as I understand it - a fairly committed rejoiner. The question is how that plays with the luke warm remainers from 2016 and with the leavers who are now looking at rejoin.
Yes that's true. Fwiw I am not in a massive hurry to rejoin, I wouldn't want to do it until there was a really clear majority in favour. Although in my opinion our economic prospects are being harmed every day we are outside the EU, the last thing we need is another divisive campaign on this issue.
Our worst course of action by far is the in/out hokey cokey every decade changing our minds. So based on recent evidence probably what the politicians and electorate will pick then.....
Comments
We probably have MPs rebel more often than in the US House in fact. They could only muster up a handful of rebels over condeming an Insurrection. Labour and the Tories by contrast have well known awkward squads.
Rejoin EU 42%
Stay out 33%
Half asked about rejoining with the following conditions..
Rejoin EU if it means [below] 38%
Stay out 35% https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/1611279112441667586/photo/1
🌹LAB: 46% (+1)
🌳CON: 25% (-3)
🔶LDM: 9% (+1)
➡️REF: 8% (+1)
Labour lead: 21% • Fieldwork 4-5/1 https://twitter.com/willgeorgelloyd/status/1611269486014783488/photo/1
Labour 48
Tory 24
LibDems 9
Reform 8
Greens 6
SNP 4
Polling conducted 4th and 5th January
OK, it's one data point, and People Polling has never been tested in battle. But if rejoin is ahead (albeit within MoE and with a lot of don't knows) on "rejoin even after all the downsides are listed", that feels significant.
https://news.sky.com/story/excess-deaths-reach-highest-level-since-pandemic-peak-how-much-are-nhs-failings-to-blame-12780446
Really frustrating that the cold weather isn't mentioned once. Every time there's a cold spell, we get more deaths. It's not rocket science to look at the historic data.
NornIron decided it didn't want an assembly and keeps voting for knuckle-dragging wazzocks who shut it down. Perhaps the same should be done with the US Congress - just leave it vacant til the next election. Would anyone miss it?
If true, this means CCHQ have given up winning 2024 at all.
There is no majority without the 'red wall'. https://twitter.com/JMagosh/status/1611280157150412800/photo/1
My old flat mate watched it - said that it was more realistic and had better characters in it than the real thing…
Harry killed 25 women in a field and shagged a Taliban fighter while he was high on coke?
However, the other ingredients of 2015 (moderately cheerful economy, elegant squishing of the Faragists by pledging a referendum) won't be present.
Will seek out the Milstein recording of the violin concerto.
Thanks for the pointer.
Does it indicate that? He's an incumbent president who has just had an okay (as opposed to the more usual bad or disastrous) round of midterm elections. If he were 72 instead of 82 then he'd likely be higher than 63%.
But actually I can't find fault with any of it.
On Sunak's part the polling shows he is more popular than Boris in the bluewall but less popular than Boris in the redwall. So it makes sense for Sunak to try and eke out a Theresa May 2017 style result in a hung parliament by holding the bluewall and at least still win most seats, even if he has conceded he will lose the Conservative majority and lose the redwall seats Boris won
So, leaving aside economics (which are of course a vital part of the debate) I suspect that in 10-15 years time, there will be a whole generation who have no visceral connection to "the pound". And that will take a lot of the sting out of the emotional side of the argument.
Minimising Tory seats is our first priority.
Full of this sort of comment:
BitterC King Von an hour ago
The baseless Climate Hoax is driving energy prices which are the biggest component of today's inflation as an add on to the unscience based shutdowns, etc reaction to the bad flu we saw in 2020, which was bio engineered in ChyNah in partnership with the USA and released to keep Trump from a 2nd term.
OBiden's open borders are a gift that will keep on giving for decades here, btw. 5 million illiterate 3rd worlders and climbing.
The climate hoax is also driving food scarcity worldwide...be it lack of fertilizers, taking farmland out of production, or driving ridiculous livestock policies.
The surveillance state is complete and JObama's misadministration is normalizing its usage.
I could go on about the rules/regs that have the force of law that the administrative state are implementing right under your nose.
I bet you think that it is not just OK but NECESSARY that Big Brother protect us against so-called disinformation
However, we were told that the threat of freedom of movement, Schengen and paying in to the Eurobudget would be enough to keep us out. Whilst they have an effect (and I'm sure that the currency thing would as well) it's surprisingly small. Surprising to me, anyway.
Rejoin means in forever.
Edit: for those under a certain age, "cheques" were pieces of paper, which...
Dumb or not, electorates tend to be fickle.
Bicameral or not, no spending bill can happen at all without the House of Representatives. They control the national purse.
Edit - seen your edit.
If I were a Red Wall Tory in particular I would put some serious thought into either defection or a new career. Even standing as a sitting Tory in a marginal Northern seat feels like a waste of energy.
In addition, Underground Coal Gasification was killed off. That could have allowed coal resources further out under the North Sea to be developed, with pre-combustion carbon capture on the syngas produced to make it low carbon.
So I don't think your prediction of clean coal plants in the UK will happen.
As soon as restoring that is mentioned the rejoin lead collapses to almost nothing
The sad thing about the Tories’ disastrous parliament is that a lot of the new Northern MPs who genuinely had something different to bring to the table and could have articulated a new generation of conservatism are just going to be swept away. They could have been the future leaders and I would hope that they are able to stay in and help reshape the party in opposition, whatever role they occupy
RIP
https://news.sky.com/story/former-chelsea-player-and-manager-gianluca-vialli-dies-aged-58-12780978
If there is any Tory recovery at all by the next election then if Labour fails to win SNP seats then it will almost certainly mean Starmer fails to get a majority
If we prosper, then rejoin will likely go nowhere; if we don't, its support will grow.
In the latter circumstances, it's too tempting not to be weaponised by a party leader, even if they're not as devoid of principle as was Boris.
https://www.techneuk.com/tracker/
The briefing on their methodology is unusually comprehensive and worth a read - seems fairly standard, though. Oddly, their tables don't have a geographical split, but Labour vote differences by age and education are less marked than in the past - Labour leads in all age groups with 40-55% of the vote, and all educational groups except "primary school only" (presumably the very elderly), by 44 to 49%. Tories do less badly among the elderly, and reform has overtaken the LibDems in that group. The biggest effect of party preference is Brexit vote, with Tories still ahead by 33 to 18 among Leavers.
So if Sunak squeezes RefUK the Tories are back over 30% even without winning back any voters from Labour or winning over DKs
As I've said before on here, my wife is a coroner's officer. I know (because she's told me) that West Sussex has run out of mortuary space, and every hospital has temporary mortuaries built from refrigerated units in place, and most of those are full too. As there's nothing special about Sussex, I expect most other areas are in the same position.