Coming back to the theme, Simon Case is perhaps at the root of a lot of the weakness.... I simply cannot imagine a Cabinet Secretary in the 1980s or 1990s being so weak, I'm not sure what the precedence is but I sense he may not remain as Cab Sec in the event of a crushing defeat for the Conservatives (I'm not convinced that is a foregone conclusion). Eyebrows were raised when the relatively young Simon landed the job, I dont sense he has the steel needed for the job.
Coming back to the theme, Simon Case is perhaps at the root of a lot of the weakness.... I simply cannot imagine a Cabinet Secretary in the 1980s or 1990s being so weak, I'm not sure what the precedence is but I sense he may not remain as Cab Sec in the event of a crushing defeat for the Conservatives (I'm not convinced that is a foregone conclusion). Eyebrows were raised when the relatively young Simon landed the job, I dont sense he has the steel needed for the job.
It’s not the Case lacked experience, although that was true, it’s that he was appointed by Boris and Cummings as a pliable and useful idiot.
It’s a kind of Catch-22: being appointed in such a way makes you inherently unfit for the job.
Coming back to the theme, Simon Case is perhaps at the root of a lot of the weakness.... I simply cannot imagine a Cabinet Secretary in the 1980s or 1990s being so weak, I'm not sure what the precedence is but I sense he may not remain as Cab Sec in the event of a crushing defeat for the Conservatives (I'm not convinced that is a foregone conclusion). Eyebrows were raised when the relatively young Simon landed the job, I dont sense he has the steel needed for the job.
It’s not the Case lacked experience, although that was true, it’s that he was appointed by Boris and Cummings as a pliable and useful idiot.
It’s a kind of Catch-22: being appointed in such a way makes you inherently unfit for the job.
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
Plus subsidy in the form of initial government investment leads, inevitably, to chumocracy.
Stay safe, everyone, and remember our readers in Moscow and Tehran.
Russian and Iranian hackers, you say?
Must be a “y” in the name of the day.
Excellent header by @Cyclefree - the question is how to re-impose standards.
How to reimpose standards: 1) Make clear what the standards are, and make them widely known. 2) When people are accused of breaking the standards, have a fair investigation and a clear punishment if they are found to have been broken. 3) Stop criticising behaviour that are not in the standards. 4) Regularly review and update the standards.
3) is IMO an important one: politicians get criticised for everything nowadays, and I'm unsure that help. If we get headlines over the price of a flight the PM or LOTO takes, then the important stuff - the real rulebreakers - get hidden.
Man was going hunting, and left a loaded rifle in the back of his car. Dog stepped on trigger and the man was hit by the bullet. Don’t leave guns loaded, people!
“The result is the Home Office losing migrant children, children, in its care who we must suppose have been trafficked for purposes that don’t bear thinking about.”
I have a strong suspicion most (all?) of these “children” are Albanian lads who came here with the express intention of working in cannabis farms, or dealing drugs on county lines, and have absconded to do exactly that
If we had a more effective government they wouldn’t be here in the first place. That’s what we should be complaining about
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
Coming back to the theme, Simon Case is perhaps at the root of a lot of the weakness.... I simply cannot imagine a Cabinet Secretary in the 1980s or 1990s being so weak, I'm not sure what the precedence is but I sense he may not remain as Cab Sec in the event of a crushing defeat for the Conservatives (I'm not convinced that is a foregone conclusion). Eyebrows were raised when the relatively young Simon landed the job, I dont sense he has the steel needed for the job.
It’s not the Case lacked experience, although that was true, it’s that he was appointed by Boris and Cummings as a pliable and useful idiot.
It’s a kind of Catch-22: being appointed in such a way makes you inherently unfit for the job.
There are so.many times in his political career where Sunak could have walked away, should have walked away, saying "this isn't right". In general, he didn't.
Weak.or dishonourable? Why not both?
(Which is one reason why replacing him is unlikely to be worth the hassle. There isn't an obvious substantial Conservative MP, let alone a Cabinet full, who doesn't suffer from Johnson taint to some degree.)
It seems the tankies' latest complaint is Abrams depleted uranium wibble wibble wibble.
The Americans will be sending tanks with the export “package”, which doesn’t have the DU armour.
Part of the reason for the low number (50) will be getting hold of enough tanks in export configuration. My guess would be that is what they can put together from already manufactured components for foreign users.
Stay safe, everyone, and remember our readers in Moscow and Tehran.
Russian and Iranian hackers, you say?
Must be a “y” in the name of the day.
Excellent header by @Cyclefree - the question is how to re-impose standards.
How to reimpose standards: 1) Make clear what the standards are, and make them widely known. 2) When people are accused of breaking the standards, have a fair investigation and a clear punishment if they are found to have been broken. 3) Stop criticising behaviour that are not in the standards. 4) Regularly review and update the standards.
3) is IMO an important one: politicians get criticised for everything nowadays, and I'm unsure that help. If we get headlines over the price of a flight the PM or LOTO takes, then the important stuff - the real rulebreakers - get hidden.
Good point.
It was only last week, that the PM travelling by government plane and government car - described respectively by commentators as “private jet” and “chauffeur-driven limousine” - was news.
It was the same with the trade delegation that went to Australia in the middle of the pandemic restrictions, taking a govt plane rather than a commercial flight - at a time when commercial long-haul flights were all over the place.
Cabinet ministers’ official movements are co-ordinated primarily by the police, for security reasons.
Trying to get the media and Opposition to concentrate on what’s actually important, rather than using hyperbolic language to describe trivialities, or trying to keep a story in the news while the investigation process is underway, is sadly going to be an uphill task.
One odd thing in the latest corruption link between Johnson and his chum at the BBC. Why did he need an introduction to his own distant relative?
£800 000 is a lot of money, even to a spendthrift like Johnson. What was the money for?
Divorce!
He’s always been rubbish with money, but was lucky that his wife earned a fortune and he made good money for little work with his Telegraph column.
Then he got divorced, and had to live with his new family on a government salary - the new wife having a part time charity job, and high expectations of lifestyle.
“The result is the Home Office losing migrant children, children, in its care who we must suppose have been trafficked for purposes that don’t bear thinking about.”
I have a strong suspicion most (all?) of these “children” are Albanian lads who came here with the express intention of working in cannabis farms, or dealing drugs on county lines, and have absconded to do exactly that
If we had a more effective government they wouldn’t be here in the first place. That’s what we should be complaining about
Jonathan Gullis made this point at PMQ's and outraged twitter. There are no prizes to be gained for making such a point.
One odd thing in the latest corruption link between Johnson and his chum at the BBC. Why did he need an introduction to his own distant relative?
£800 000 is a lot of money, even to a spendthrift like Johnson. What was the money for?
Divorce!
He’s always been rubbish with money, but was lucky that his wife earned a fortune and he made good money for little work with his Telegraph column.
Then he got divorced, and had to live with his new family on a government salary - the new wife having a part time charity job, and high expectations of lifestyle.
Boris is said to own two or three houses, and the papers recently had him sniffing around another pile in Tunbridge Wells. Is he really skint or just careful to the point of miserly?
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
The impression I got from the header is of a leader who lacks imagination and is reactive. Instead of thinking about a problem and getting ahead of it, it's like all his decision-making is between two alternatives presented to him by his subordinates.
It's not so much that Sunak is dishonourable as it is the Conservative Party is dishonourable. It is openly corrupt and Sunak is the leader. Worse is that even if he wanted to be whiter than white and stop the corruption they'd simply get rid of him and install someone else.
It is less than 7 years ago since we had a Prime Minister leading a functioning government that wasn't adrift, bent, or corrupt. And since then we've had 4 more Prime Ministers. We're at risk of getting a 5th. And despite that the Corruption Party still insists that we vote them back into office so that they can pocket more of our money for themselves.
Man was going hunting, and left a loaded rifle in the back of his car. Dog stepped on trigger and the man was hit by the bullet. Don’t leave guns loaded, people!
Sad for him and his family but he doesn't look the brightest firework in the display.
On Brexit benefits I mentioned some time ago that moving expenses to the EU are now VAT-free, which can save you several hundred pounds, and encourages the emigration HYUFD would like to see to reduce the housing crisis.
One odd thing in the latest corruption link between Johnson and his chum at the BBC. Why did he need an introduction to his own distant relative?
£800 000 is a lot of money, even to a spendthrift like Johnson. What was the money for?
Divorce!
He’s always been rubbish with money, but was lucky that his wife earned a fortune and he made good money for little work with his Telegraph column.
Then he got divorced, and had to live with his new family on a government salary - the new wife having a part time charity job, and high expectations of lifestyle.
Boris is said to own two or three houses, and the papers recently had him sniffing around another pile in Tunbridge Wells. Is he really skint or just careful to the point of miserly?
Does make you wonder whether the appearance of being skint is just part of the act. Who can suspect bumbling Boris of benefiting from corruption when he's so bad with money he's always caught short?
One odd thing in the latest corruption link between Johnson and his chum at the BBC. Why did he need an introduction to his own distant relative?
£800 000 is a lot of money, even to a spendthrift like Johnson. What was the money for?
Divorce!
He’s always been rubbish with money, but was lucky that his wife earned a fortune and he made good money for little work with his Telegraph column.
Then he got divorced, and had to live with his new family on a government salary - the new wife having a part time charity job, and high expectations of lifestyle.
Boris is said to own two or three houses, and the papers recently had him sniffing around another pile in Tunbridge Wells. Is he really skint or just careful to the point of miserly?
My dad - always careful with money - taught me a saying: "Expenditure swells to fill any possible income".
In other words, when you're young and not earning much, you go out and have a good time. When you start earning more, you spend more. You buy slightly better things; you buy more of them. Instead of that cheap bottle of £7 plonk, you get a £15 one. Instead of a cheap smartphone, you get the latest Apple whatever.
He then said the key is to break that cycle: don't be miserly, but ensure your expenditure does not fill your income. In the case of a relative, he tries to save/invest 15% of his take home income - even if they was really hard when he was starting out.
I fear Boris is someone who has never learnt that. As soon as he earns something, even if it is a lot, it will disappear.
I'd also like, belatedly, to thank you for engaging on a previous thread on the Scottish gender legislation, which I did write up a response for, but then pitched into the Christmas period and never posted. Rather than head off on that topic again here, I'd prefer now to work those musings as relevant to future discussions.
“The result is the Home Office losing migrant children, children, in its care who we must suppose have been trafficked for purposes that don’t bear thinking about.”
I have a strong suspicion most (all?) of these “children” are Albanian lads who came here with the express intention of working in cannabis farms, or dealing drugs on county lines, and have absconded to do exactly that
If we had a more effective government they wouldn’t be here in the first place. That’s what we should be complaining about
Jonathan Gullis made this point at PMQ's and outraged twitter. There are no prizes to be gained for making such a point.
There was an Afghan asylum-seeker sentenced to life for murder a few days ago. He was 19, and already on the run for two other murders committed elsewhere. He had told UK authorities he was 14, and was treated as a child until he was arrested, placed with a foster mother whose concerns about his age and behaviour were ignored.
“The result is the Home Office losing migrant children, children, in its care who we must suppose have been trafficked for purposes that don’t bear thinking about.”
I have a strong suspicion most (all?) of these “children” are Albanian lads who came here with the express intention of working in cannabis farms, or dealing drugs on county lines, and have absconded to do exactly that
If we had a more effective government they wouldn’t be here in the first place. That’s what we should be complaining about
So you are saying that these teenagers are being Trafficked? And therefore legitimate asylum seekers?
It seems the tankies' latest complaint is Abrams depleted uranium wibble wibble wibble.
The Americans will be sending tanks with the export “package”, which doesn’t have the DU armour.
Part of the reason for the low number (50) will be getting hold of enough tanks in export configuration. My guess would be that is what they can put together from already manufactured components for foreign users.
If that's the case, I don't think it matters to them. Western weapons are evil. Russian weapons are fine. One ends a post with "I think they (pro-Ukrainians) just want more and more weapons."
“The result is the Home Office losing migrant children, children, in its care who we must suppose have been trafficked for purposes that don’t bear thinking about.”
I have a strong suspicion most (all?) of these “children” are Albanian lads who came here with the express intention of working in cannabis farms, or dealing drugs on county lines, and have absconded to do exactly that
If we had a more effective government they wouldn’t be here in the first place. That’s what we should be complaining about
They may well be Albanian lads brought here for this purpose - but these purposes still don't bear thinking about. Others will be caught up in and harmed by what they are doing. Someone does not stop being vulnerable or exploited just because they have turned 18.
And if they are hardened criminals, allowing them to escape is negligence and a breach of the duty of care owed to us.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
The impression I got from the header is of a leader who lacks imagination and is reactive. Instead of thinking about a problem and getting ahead of it, it's like all his decision-making is between two alternatives presented to him by his subordinates.
That can work, but only if your subordinates are utterly top-notch. Both in terms of what the options they present and the decisions they refer up.
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
They do need customers though. British car production reached a 66 year low last year:
Good reason why there haven't been so many attacks lately. Russia are just using things as soon as they get them.
Not only are they using things as soon as they get them, but they’re not even thinking about what they are doing with them, in the context of a war. There’s even photos and flight tracking of the plane that delivered the drones.
Of course the Ukranians, with half the world spying for them at the moment, knew exactly what was coming and when, and were prepared for it.
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
They do need customers though. British car production reached a 66 year low last year:
I would have hoped that there was enough demand for energy storage from households, businesses and the grid to soak up any production that is not used by cars, and once the production of batteries is here it will be easier to convince someone to build electric cars here as they will know they won't have to import the batteries.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Yet the real challenge is not to improve the situation but to avoid it getting worse. A new report published this week by UK in a Changing Europe, a think tank, highlights the numerous grace periods and short-term deals in the TCA that are due to expire in the coming years. The EU’s “equivalence” decision allowing UK-based clearing houses to service EU firms expires in June 2025, as does a similar deal permitting the free flow of data. From 2027, exports of electric vehicles will be subject to tariffs, depending on how many of their parts originated in Britain and the EU. The fisheries deal that nearly derailed the Brexit talks will expire in June 2025. Not coincidentally, an energy cooperation deal expires on the same day.
Brexiteers always said that Brexit was a process, not an event. They were right. The risk is that it is a process that is only heading one way.
Disgraceful bias on BBC Today: UK car production has fallen to its lowest level since 1956 and the BBC attributes this solely to shortage of semiconductors. Brexit not even mentioned.
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
They do need customers though. British car production reached a 66 year low last year:
I would have hoped that there was enough demand for energy storage from households, businesses and the grid to soak up any production that is not used by cars, and once the production of batteries is here it will be easier to convince someone to build electric cars here as they will know they won't have to import the batteries.
It would seem sensible to line up the customers first. British batteries does also make exports trickier due to tariff rules on content.
I don't think we will see UK car manufacturing extinct with the IC engine in 2030, but it is hard to see it thriving.
Nevermind, the workers can all move into financial services I suppose.
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
They do need customers though. British car production reached a 66 year low last year:
I would have hoped that there was enough demand for energy storage from households, businesses and the grid to soak up any production that is not used by cars, and once the production of batteries is here it will be easier to convince someone to build electric cars here as they will know they won't have to import the batteries.
Yes. We have got people currently being paid to not use power in peak periods. Its patently obvious that a battery solution would help manage the load evenly across the day, and if you couple it with local solar generation you have your own micro power station.
But to do so takes vision. Instead of spending tens of billions propping up failed energy companies, offer tax breaks to companies building batteries and solar panels, and incentivise consumers to buy them.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I don't dislike Sunak, apart from his politics - as you say, he's clearly a big step up from Truss. But the point you mention about Ministers obsessively demanding to see everything seems endemic in the current Government - I know of three Departments where it's (according to people close to them) a major block to anything getting done. The pinnacle was Raab's example, demanding differently-formatted Excel sheets so he could srudy every Afghan refugee case during the fall of Kabul. Exceptions seem to be Cleverly and Wallace, both known for actually allowing progress without micromanaging every sheet of paper.
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
They do need customers though. British car production reached a 66 year low last year:
I would have hoped that there was enough demand for energy storage from households, businesses and the grid to soak up any production that is not used by cars, and once the production of batteries is here it will be easier to convince someone to build electric cars here as they will know they won't have to import the batteries.
It would seem sensible to line up the customers first. British batteries does also make exports trickier due to tariff rules on content.
I don't think we will see UK car manufacturing extinct wit the IC engine in 2030, but it is hard to see it thriving.
Nevermind, the workers can all move into financial services I suppose.
But you're setting up a chicken and egg situation. The car manufacturers are not starting production here because there's no battery production, and the battery production can't get started because there's no electric car production.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Disgraceful bias on BBC Today: UK car production has fallen to its lowest level since 1956 and the BBC attributes this solely to shortage of semiconductors. Brexit not even mentioned.
It was also about item 10 in the running order.
The pro-Con bias is just preposterous.
Other nations car production were down in 2022 too, though generally not so much.
Sunak had to appoint Braverman to a key Cabinet post given it was her backing of him rather than Boris that helped ensure he faced no contest with the membership. Raab was a key Sunak supporter in both leadership elections and got his reward.
Italy has a more rightwing government than the UK now, Meloni is much more to GB news' flavour than Sunak
The car manufacturers are not starting production here because there's no battery production, and the battery production can't get started because there's no electric car production.
If only there was a humongous market, right on our doorstep...
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
They do need customers though. British car production reached a 66 year low last year:
I would have hoped that there was enough demand for energy storage from households, businesses and the grid to soak up any production that is not used by cars, and once the production of batteries is here it will be easier to convince someone to build electric cars here as they will know they won't have to import the batteries.
It would seem sensible to line up the customers first. British batteries does also make exports trickier due to tariff rules on content.
I don't think we will see UK car manufacturing extinct wit the IC engine in 2030, but it is hard to see it thriving.
Nevermind, the workers can all move into financial services I suppose.
But you're setting up a chicken and egg situation. The car manufacturers are not starting production here because there's no battery production, and the battery production can't get started because there's no electric car production.
The Vauxhall Corsa is going all electric, but importing it's batteries. Nissan is going electric too but has its own associated plant.
One odd thing in the latest corruption link between Johnson and his chum at the BBC. Why did he need an introduction to his own distant relative?
£800 000 is a lot of money, even to a spendthrift like Johnson. What was the money for?
Divorce!
He’s always been rubbish with money, but was lucky that his wife earned a fortune and he made good money for little work with his Telegraph column.
Then he got divorced, and had to live with his new family on a government salary - the new wife having a part time charity job, and high expectations of lifestyle.
Boris is said to own two or three houses, and the papers recently had him sniffing around another pile in Tunbridge Wells. Is he really skint or just careful to the point of miserly?
My dad - always careful with money - taught me a saying: "Expenditure swells to fill any possible income".
In other words, when you're young and not earning much, you go out and have a good time. When you start earning more, you spend more. You buy slightly better things; you buy more of them. Instead of that cheap bottle of £7 plonk, you get a £15 one. Instead of a cheap smartphone, you get the latest Apple whatever.
He then said the key is to break that cycle: don't be miserly, but ensure your expenditure does not fill your income. In the case of a relative, he tries to save/invest 15% of his take home income - even if they was really hard when he was starting out.
I fear Boris is someone who has never learnt that. As soon as he earns something, even if it is a lot, it will disappear.
I think we all know someone like that. In my case, it's my brother. Has a decent job, earns good money, but is perpetually broke, maxing out the credit cards and living from one paycheck to the next. I don't know how or why he does it.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
No it doesn't, the latest Deltapoll gives the Tories over 200 seats. Just unlike other pollsters it has RefUK under 5%
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
They do need customers though. British car production reached a 66 year low last year:
I would have hoped that there was enough demand for energy storage from households, businesses and the grid to soak up any production that is not used by cars, and once the production of batteries is here it will be easier to convince someone to build electric cars here as they will know they won't have to import the batteries.
It's still an investment of billions, which will take well over a decade to pay off. Commercial companies won't invest in any such unproven ventures - and the proven manufacturers, Chinese, S Korean, American etc haven't shown any interest.
Without a significant nudge from government, it might stay that way.
Without Brexit, it would likely already be built, and selling everything it could make.
Disgraceful bias on BBC Today: UK car production has fallen to its lowest level since 1956 and the BBC attributes this solely to shortage of semiconductors. Brexit not even mentioned.
It was also about item 10 in the running order.
The pro-Con bias is just preposterous.
That's insane. UK car production has underperformed so massively against our competitors (who all faced the same chips shortage) that there is clearly something UK-specific at work. It might not be Brexit, but it almost certainly is.
Coming back to the theme, Simon Case is perhaps at the root of a lot of the weakness.... I simply cannot imagine a Cabinet Secretary in the 1980s or 1990s being so weak, I'm not sure what the precedence is but I sense he may not remain as Cab Sec in the event of a crushing defeat for the Conservatives (I'm not convinced that is a foregone conclusion). Eyebrows were raised when the relatively young Simon landed the job, I dont sense he has the steel needed for the job.
He is only teh lackey, this lot rot from the head. Rishi is a useless tosser, weak as ditch water.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
It is certainly feeling a bit '97, but Starmer doesn't have Blair's wide appeal and there is still time for the Tories to steady the ship. So, 'on the cards', yes. Inevitable? Definitely not.
Sunak had to appoint Braverman to a key Cabinet post given it was her backing of him rather than Boris that helped ensure he faced no contest with the membership. Raab was a key Sunak supporter in both leadership elections and got his reward.
Italy has a more rightwing government than the UK now, Meloni is much more to GB news' flavour than Sunak
'Our government isn't as right wing as a bunch of actual fascists' doesn't quite do it for me as a statement.
One odd thing in the latest corruption link between Johnson and his chum at the BBC. Why did he need an introduction to his own distant relative?
£800 000 is a lot of money, even to a spendthrift like Johnson. What was the money for?
Divorce!
He’s always been rubbish with money, but was lucky that his wife earned a fortune and he made good money for little work with his Telegraph column.
Then he got divorced, and had to live with his new family on a government salary - the new wife having a part time charity job, and high expectations of lifestyle.
When he was Foreign Secretary or PM though he got a big country house, Chevening and Chequers respectively and could be a landlord and let out a London home.
Now as a backbencher he has lost his country pile (and No 10) and can't do that and is on less money as a backbencher than the 6 figures he earnt as PM and in Cabinet
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
No it doesn't, the latest Deltapoll gives the Tories over 200 seats. Just unlike other pollsters it has RefUK under 5%
Fantasies of a Tory wipeout will remain just that (fantasies) unless a rival party on the right steals its bedrock.
Direct switching from Tory to Labour is relatively modest and, as @Sean_F says, centre-right voters haven't just disappeared or vanished into thin air.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
No it doesn't, the latest Deltapoll gives the Tories over 200 seats. Just unlike other pollsters it has RefUK under 5%
Does losing 40% of current seats not count as a meltdown in your eyes?
On a point of PB pedantry, a postilion is a particular member of a crew for a horsedrawn coach or similar; and one wouldn't use a whole horse team and coach to deliver an envelope (unless, of course, the postilion was otherwise sitting around in the stables doing nothing and available for errands). A licensed porter would be another option in the London of the Zeitgeist in question ...
Stay safe, everyone, and remember our readers in Moscow and Tehran.
Russian and Iranian hackers, you say?
Must be a “y” in the name of the day.
Excellent header by @Cyclefree - the question is how to re-impose standards.
How to reimpose standards: 1) Make clear what the standards are, and make them widely known. 2) When people are accused of breaking the standards, have a fair investigation and a clear punishment if they are found to have been broken. 3) Stop criticising behaviour that are not in the standards. 4) Regularly review and update the standards.
3) is IMO an important one: politicians get criticised for everything nowadays, and I'm unsure that help. If we get headlines over the price of a flight the PM or LOTO takes, then the important stuff - the real rulebreakers - get hidden.
Good point.
It was only last week, that the PM travelling by government plane and government car - described respectively by commentators as “private jet” and “chauffeur-driven limousine” - was news.
It was the same with the trade delegation that went to Australia in the middle of the pandemic restrictions, taking a govt plane rather than a commercial flight - at a time when commercial long-haul flights were all over the place.
Cabinet ministers’ official movements are co-ordinated primarily by the police, for security reasons.
Trying to get the media and Opposition to concentrate on what’s actually important, rather than using hyperbolic language to describe trivialities, or trying to keep a story in the news while the investigation process is underway, is sadly going to be an uphill task.
Valiant try Sandpit but that turd cannot be polished.
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
They do need customers though. British car production reached a 66 year low last year:
I would have hoped that there was enough demand for energy storage from households, businesses and the grid to soak up any production that is not used by cars, and once the production of batteries is here it will be easier to convince someone to build electric cars here as they will know they won't have to import the batteries.
It's still an investment of billions, which will take well over a decade to pay off. Commercial companies won't invest in any such unproven ventures - and the proven manufacturers, Chinese, S Korean, American etc haven't shown any interest.
Without a significant nudge from government, it might stay that way.
Without Brexit, it would likely already be built, and selling everything it could make.
I'd like to see the government provide a nudge to help plants get built, but that avoids the directors walking away with lots of money without a battery being produced.
Wouldn't be a terrible idea for the government to sign up as the purchaser of the first several GWh of production.
Sunak had to appoint Braverman to a key Cabinet post given it was her backing of him rather than Boris that helped ensure he faced no contest with the membership. Raab was a key Sunak supporter in both leadership elections and got his reward.
Italy has a more rightwing government than the UK now, Meloni is much more to GB news' flavour than Sunak
'Our government isn't as right wing as a bunch of actual fascists' doesn't quite do it for me as a statement.
It isn't especially right wing, not by normal UK standards. It is certainly not fascist.
It is a chumocracy, and incompetent, features which have developed over a long period and which are best remedied by a comprehensive clear-out.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
No it doesn't, the latest Deltapoll gives the Tories over 200 seats. Just unlike other pollsters it has RefUK under 5%
Does losing 40% of current seats not count as a meltdown in your eyes?
I seem to recall that the other day HYUFD was claiming that three Westminster seats in Scotland would be a good result for Mr Sunak.
Stay safe, everyone, and remember our readers in Moscow and Tehran.
Russian and Iranian hackers, you say?
Must be a “y” in the name of the day.
Excellent header by @Cyclefree - the question is how to re-impose standards.
How to reimpose standards: 1) Make clear what the standards are, and make them widely known. 2) When people are accused of breaking the standards, have a fair investigation and a clear punishment if they are found to have been broken. 3) Stop criticising behaviour that are not in the standards. 4) Regularly review and update the standards.
3) is IMO an important one: politicians get criticised for everything nowadays, and I'm unsure that help. If we get headlines over the price of a flight the PM or LOTO takes, then the important stuff - the real rulebreakers - get hidden.
Good point.
It was only last week, that the PM travelling by government plane and government car - described respectively by commentators as “private jet” and “chauffeur-driven limousine” - was news.
It was the same with the trade delegation that went to Australia in the middle of the pandemic restrictions, taking a govt plane rather than a commercial flight - at a time when commercial long-haul flights were all over the place.
Cabinet ministers’ official movements are co-ordinated primarily by the police, for security reasons.
Trying to get the media and Opposition to concentrate on what’s actually important, rather than using hyperbolic language to describe trivialities, or trying to keep a story in the news while the investigation process is underway, is sadly going to be an uphill task.
Valiant try Sandpit but that turd cannot be polished.
Not even if you go at it with a Black and Decker with a wire brush in the chuck? Perhaps not, on reflection.
Disgraceful bias on BBC Today: UK car production has fallen to its lowest level since 1956 and the BBC attributes this solely to shortage of semiconductors. Brexit not even mentioned.
It was also about item 10 in the running order.
The pro-Con bias is just preposterous.
Other nations car production were down in 2022 too, though generally not so much.
Down to levels last seen in the early 1950s?? I think not.
Rather than direct cash, the government should offer a subsidy for actually delivering batteries at scale. X per GWh, with X scaled to U.K. content/added value. To any potential manufacturer.
Absolutely. The last lot of management at BritishVolt, gave the impression that their primary business was chasing a subsidy cheque, much more than trying to actually open the factory and produce any batteries. Government incentives need to be tied to actual production.
They do need customers though. British car production reached a 66 year low last year:
I would have hoped that there was enough demand for energy storage from households, businesses and the grid to soak up any production that is not used by cars, and once the production of batteries is here it will be easier to convince someone to build electric cars here as they will know they won't have to import the batteries.
Getting production figures up significantly needs new OEMs. There are only three volume manufacturers left - Mini, Nissan and JLR. One of those is settling for managed decline and the other two don't exactly have vast growth potential.
Sunak had to appoint Braverman to a key Cabinet post given it was her backing of him rather than Boris that helped ensure he faced no contest with the membership. Raab was a key Sunak supporter in both leadership elections and got his reward.
Italy has a more rightwing government than the UK now, Meloni is much more to GB news' flavour than Sunak
'Our government isn't as right wing as a bunch of actual fascists' doesn't quite do it for me as a statement.
It isn't especially right wing, not by normal UK standards. It is certainly not fascist.
It is a chumocracy, and incompetent, features which have developed over a long period and which are best remedied by a comprehensive clear-out.
Given how many of the 'chums' are in the civil service, one way or another, that's not going to be achieved solely by a change of government.
Sunak is less bad than Boris and less crazy than Truss. However both had more political skill than Sunak. His public school veneer is less deep than Cameron’s. His charm is pretty superficial.
Sunak is a technocrat who has spent his life focussed on money. There is no depth. Some people go for that, but I don’t. There is no direction or judgement, just management. He’s not hugely good at that it seems.
Despite his belated conversation, he was also perfectly happy to serve Boris.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Yes, I think that's exactly right, Peter.
I'd add that Sunak has shown he is capable of working fast and on a degree of instinct, as with getting the COVID packages together, when others are breathing down his neck. To be a better PM he now needs to breathe down his own neck and force himself into the mode of trusting instinct to a certain extent rather than relying wholly on the comfort blanket of the spreadsheet or process.
Sunak's personal ratings are still just about at a level where he could compete rather better in the polls in normal times. In normal times you'd wonder whether the polls were a little wrong. I don't think they are wrong though, the electorate for certain noticed the chaos of the last year, and perhaps sense Sunak is not yet a fixture in the role. And while that remains in doubt, the dire ratings of the Tory party as a whole, and the worry what it might do next, are relevant to the polling. Even if Sunak retains OK ratimgs into 2024, defenestration anxiety could hold back voters from returning to the fold
It might not be Brexit, but it almost certainly is.
Peak UK car production was in 2016...
Some people thought that Brexit might have a negative impact on the UK car industry, but the PB 'experts' assured us that was not the case.
It looks like the coincident timing of Brexit and the switch to EV production has been the killer. Manufacturers are dissuaded from the large investments needed by the UK's detachment from the Single Market. I suppose the government could have taken advantage of Brexit to pour in large amounts of state aid, but that would have taken some guts what with the general financial situation. Mass car production in the UK is in a very precarious state.
Disgraceful bias on BBC Today: UK car production has fallen to its lowest level since 1956 and the BBC attributes this solely to shortage of semiconductors. Brexit not even mentioned.
It was also about item 10 in the running order.
The pro-Con bias is just preposterous.
That's insane. UK car production has underperformed so massively against our competitors (who all faced the same chips shortage) that there is clearly something UK-specific at work. It might not be Brexit, but it almost certainly is.
Well exactly. It is the systematic stubborn refusal to even mention the word Brexit, and to present arguments for and against it being a factor, that irritates.
It is either plain journalistic incompetence or it is corruption. I suspect the latter is the principal factor.
One odd thing in the latest corruption link between Johnson and his chum at the BBC. Why did he need an introduction to his own distant relative?
£800 000 is a lot of money, even to a spendthrift like Johnson. What was the money for?
Divorce!
He’s always been rubbish with money, but was lucky that his wife earned a fortune and he made good money for little work with his Telegraph column.
Then he got divorced, and had to live with his new family on a government salary - the new wife having a part time charity job, and high expectations of lifestyle.
When he was Foreign Secretary or PM though he got a big country house, Chevening and Chequers respectively and could be a landlord and let out a London home.
Now as a backbencher he has lost his country pile (and No 10) and can't do that and is on less money as a backbencher than the 6 figures he earnt as PM and in Cabinet
He should ask Lee Anderson MP for some money saving tips.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
No it doesn't, the latest Deltapoll gives the Tories over 200 seats. Just unlike other pollsters it has RefUK under 5%
Does losing 40% of current seats not count as a meltdown in your eyes?
And that on the most favourable of current polls.
No, in 1997 and 1906 we lost over half of our seats
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
No it doesn't, the latest Deltapoll gives the Tories over 200 seats. Just unlike other pollsters it has RefUK under 5%
Does losing 40% of current seats not count as a meltdown in your eyes?
And that on the most favourable of current polls.
No, in 1997 we lost over half of our seats
Exceeding that would be difficult, but if you try hard enough I think it's possible.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
No it doesn't, the latest Deltapoll gives the Tories over 200 seats. Just unlike other pollsters it has RefUK under 5%
Does losing 40% of current seats not count as a meltdown in your eyes?
And that on the most favourable of current polls.
No, in 1997 we lost over half of our seats
That the Tories are ramping the loss of “only” 40% of their seats as being their best case scenario has made my day. Cheers Mini Franco!
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
No it doesn't, the latest Deltapoll gives the Tories over 200 seats. Just unlike other pollsters it has RefUK under 5%
Fantasies of a Tory wipeout will remain just that (fantasies) unless a rival party on the right steals its bedrock.
Direct switching from Tory to Labour is relatively modest and, as @Sean_F says, centre-right voters haven't just disappeared or vanished into thin air.
There was a fair chunk of that in 1997, though. Fed up Conservative-minded voters deciding that they'd rather not bother voting.
Bet there was something similar on the red side in 2019.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
No it doesn't, the latest Deltapoll gives the Tories over 200 seats. Just unlike other pollsters it has RefUK under 5%
Does losing 40% of current seats not count as a meltdown in your eyes?
And that on the most favourable of current polls.
No, in 1997 we lost over half of our seats
That the Tories are ramping the loss of “only” 40% of their seats as being their best case scenario has made my day. Cheers Mini Franco!
Interestingly, that would match the SNP performance in 2017.
Some way to go before matching the Liberal Democrats in 2015 though...
Hidden in the car production figures: at the top end of the market, Bentley and Rolls-Royce both saw record deliveries in 2022. Small volumes compared to the mass-market cars, but with a lot of skilled jobs behind them and not really affected by chip shortages. A lot of exports too, to all over the world.
On a point of PB pedantry, a postilion is a particular member of a crew for a horsedrawn coach or similar; and one wouldn't use a whole horse team and coach to deliver an envelope (unless, of course, the postilion was otherwise sitting around in the stables doing nothing and available for errands). A licensed porter would be another option in the London of the Zeitgeist in question ...
On a point of PB pedantry, a postilion is a particular member of a crew for a horsedrawn coach or similar; and one wouldn't use a whole horse team and coach to deliver an envelope (unless, of course, the postilion was otherwise sitting around in the stables doing nothing and available for errands). A licensed porter would be another option in the London of the Zeitgeist in question ...
The Tories certainly deserve to lose half their seats based on their poor performance. FPTP and the dark arts of the Tory right (the sort of smear campaign that destroyed Penny Mordaunt ) will limit the losses. The next election could be more 2010 or1992 than 1997.
I think Sunak is intelligent, industrious, level-headed, and a nice guy. However, he is not a man manager - possibly too "nice" to give hard messages - and personally gets involved in too much of the detail ( running his own models, personally reviewing the evidence etc) when he should really hold others to account for the same and select/build a good team.
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
I'd certainly stick with him, CR, if only because if the Tories change the nurse (again) for sure we'll finish up with something worse.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Might he? All the polling at the end of his honeymoon period suggests that electoral meltdown is on the cards still.
No it doesn't, the latest Deltapoll gives the Tories over 200 seats. Just unlike other pollsters it has RefUK under 5%
Fantasies of a Tory wipeout will remain just that (fantasies) unless a rival party on the right steals its bedrock.
Direct switching from Tory to Labour is relatively modest and, as @Sean_F says, centre-right voters haven't just disappeared or vanished into thin air.
There was a fair chunk of that in 1997, though. Fed up Conservative-minded voters deciding that they'd rather not bother voting.
Bet there was something similar on the red side in 2019.
More in 2010. The left still voted for Corbyn even if swing voters and Leave voters didn't
Comments
It’s a kind of Catch-22: being appointed in such a way makes you inherently unfit for the job.
A very good piece by @Cyclefree
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jan/25/australian-startup-recharge-bids-for-britishvolt-with-a-view-to-reviving-uk-battery-plant
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-64405220
Stay safe, everyone, and remember our readers in Moscow and Tehran.
Must be a “y” in the name of the day.
Excellent header by @Cyclefree - the question is how to re-impose standards.
And we are back on topic
1) Make clear what the standards are, and make them widely known.
2) When people are accused of breaking the standards, have a fair investigation and a clear punishment if they are found to have been broken.
3) Stop criticising behaviour that are not in the standards.
4) Regularly review and update the standards.
3) is IMO an important one: politicians get criticised for everything nowadays, and I'm unsure that help. If we get headlines over the price of a flight the PM or LOTO takes, then the important stuff - the real rulebreakers - get hidden.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2023/01/25/dog-shoots-owner-dead/
Man was going hunting, and left a loaded rifle in the back of his car. Dog stepped on trigger and the man was hit by the bullet. Don’t leave guns loaded, people!
“The result is the Home Office losing migrant children, children, in its care who we must suppose have been trafficked for purposes that don’t bear thinking about.”
I have a strong suspicion most (all?) of these “children” are Albanian lads who came here with the express intention of working in cannabis farms, or dealing drugs on county lines, and have absconded to do exactly that
If we had a more effective government they wouldn’t be here in the first place. That’s what we should be complaining about
He also thinks competent and measured administration is enough and doesn't give enough weight to the politics - lacking sharp political instincts and PR judgement - and is very risk averse, and his penchant for playing it safe means he could be overtaken by events.
He's miles better than Truss or Johnson, and is learning on the job, but the risk is he doesn't get credit for what he does get right and events will rapidly overtake him.
I'd still stick with him though. I've got no doubt he's working hard to fix things but it won't save the Tories.
£800 000 is a lot of money, even to a spendthrift like Johnson. What was the money for?
There are so.many times in his political career where Sunak could have walked away, should have walked away, saying "this isn't right". In general, he didn't.
Weak.or dishonourable? Why not both?
(Which is one reason why replacing him is unlikely to be worth the hassle. There isn't an obvious substantial Conservative MP, let alone a Cabinet full, who doesn't suffer from Johnson taint to some degree.)
"Dad's Army": What Was The Military Career of Lance Corporal Jones?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WL_F3E973bU
Interesting details from @Gerjon_ and @olga_pp98 possibly indicating a quick turn around between Shahed/ Geran-2 UAVs arriving in Russia from Iran and being used against Ukraine. (h/t @ELINTNews)
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1618488225840140288
Then launched lots of them only for them to all be shot down:
The Ukrainian Air Force says that it shot down 24 Shahed/ Geran-2 UAVs over night that were launched from eastern coast of the Sea of Azov.
https://twitter.com/RALee85/status/1618478782733758464
Good reason why there haven't been so many attacks lately. Russia are just using things as soon as they get them.
Part of the reason for the low number (50) will be getting hold of enough tanks in export configuration. My guess would be that is what they can put together from already manufactured components for foreign users.
It was only last week, that the PM travelling by government plane and government car - described respectively by commentators as “private jet” and “chauffeur-driven limousine” - was news.
It was the same with the trade delegation that went to Australia in the middle of the pandemic restrictions, taking a govt plane rather than a commercial flight - at a time when commercial long-haul flights were all over the place.
Cabinet ministers’ official movements are co-ordinated primarily by the police, for security reasons.
Trying to get the media and Opposition to concentrate on what’s actually important, rather than using hyperbolic language to describe trivialities, or trying to keep a story in the news while the investigation process is underway, is sadly going to be an uphill task.
He’s always been rubbish with money, but was lucky that his wife earned a fortune and he made good money for little work with his Telegraph column.
Then he got divorced, and had to live with his new family on a government salary - the new wife having a part time charity job, and high expectations of lifestyle.
Hard not to agree with every word.
It is less than 7 years ago since we had a Prime Minister leading a functioning government that wasn't adrift, bent, or corrupt. And since then we've had 4 more Prime Ministers. We're at risk of getting a 5th. And despite that the Corruption Party still insists that we vote them back into office so that they can pocket more of our money for themselves.
To quote someone else, No. No. No.
https://twitter.com/nadhimzahawi/status/1618307909208928256?t=xh_Un9sgJC1Tr3acc-9ufQ&s=19
In other words, when you're young and not earning much, you go out and have a good time. When you start earning more, you spend more. You buy slightly better things; you buy more of them. Instead of that cheap bottle of £7 plonk, you get a £15 one. Instead of a cheap smartphone, you get the latest Apple whatever.
He then said the key is to break that cycle: don't be miserly, but ensure your expenditure does not fill your income. In the case of a relative, he tries to save/invest 15% of his take home income - even if they was really hard when he was starting out.
I fear Boris is someone who has never learnt that. As soon as he earns something, even if it is a lot, it will disappear.
I'd also like, belatedly, to thank you for engaging on a previous thread on the Scottish gender legislation, which I did write up a response for, but then pitched into the Christmas period and never posted. Rather than head off on that topic again here, I'd prefer now to work those musings as relevant to future discussions.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11658567/Asylum-seeker-21-lied-14-UK-guilty-murdering-aspiring-marine.html
Well, duh.
And if they are hardened criminals, allowing them to escape is negligence and a breach of the duty of care owed to us.
Which is part of the problem.
BBC News - UK car production collapses to lowest for 66 years
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64399748
He is said to have been marginalised in Rishi Sunak's No 1… https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1618517881062309889
Of course the Ukranians, with half the world spying for them at the moment, knew exactly what was coming and when, and were prepared for it.
Your assessment of S is similar to mine. He won't win the next GE, but he might prevent a meltdown. I'd buy that if I were a Conservative supporter. (In case you hadn't noticed, I'm not.)
Brexiteers always said that Brexit was a process, not an event. They were right. The risk is that it is a process that is only heading one way.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/the-real-brexit-challenge-is-to-avoid-the-situation-getting-even-worse-7w2ldvcxh
It was also about item 10 in the running order.
The pro-Con bias is just preposterous.
I don't think we will see UK car manufacturing extinct with the IC engine in 2030, but it is hard to see it thriving.
Nevermind, the workers can all move into financial services I suppose.
But to do so takes vision. Instead of spending tens of billions propping up failed energy companies, offer tax breaks to companies building batteries and solar panels, and incentivise consumers to buy them.
Although I suppose his being a close personal friend of Prince William may be giving Sunak pause.
membership. Raab was a key Sunak supporter in both leadership elections and got his reward.
Italy has a more rightwing government than the UK now, Meloni is much more to GB news' flavour than Sunak
Without a significant nudge from government, it might stay that way.
Without Brexit, it would likely already be built, and selling everything it could make.
Jesus. The Labour herd circle-jerk was so hard I'm surprised they don't have to apply the Elizabeth Ardern cream this morning.
Moderate yourself fellas - there's possibly another two years to go yet and you'll have nothing left of it by the end at this rate.
Now as a backbencher he has lost his country pile (and No 10) and can't do that and is on less money as a backbencher than the 6 figures he earnt as PM and in Cabinet
Direct switching from Tory to Labour is relatively modest and, as @Sean_F says, centre-right voters haven't just disappeared or vanished into thin air.
Some people thought that Brexit might have a negative impact on the UK car industry, but the PB 'experts' assured us that was not the case.
And that on the most favourable of current polls.
On a point of PB pedantry, a postilion is a particular member of a crew for a horsedrawn coach or similar; and one wouldn't use a whole horse team and coach to deliver an envelope (unless, of course, the postilion was otherwise sitting around in the stables doing nothing and available for errands). A licensed porter would be another option in the London of the Zeitgeist in question ...
Wouldn't be a terrible idea for the government to sign up as the purchaser of the first several GWh of production.
It is a chumocracy, and incompetent, features which have developed over a long period and which are best remedied by a comprehensive clear-out.
Sunak is a technocrat who has spent his life focussed on money. There is no depth. Some people go for that, but I don’t. There is no direction or judgement, just management. He’s not hugely good at that it seems.
Despite his belated conversation, he was also perfectly happy to serve Boris.
Sunak's personal ratings are still just about at a level where he could compete rather better in the polls in normal times. In normal times you'd wonder whether the polls were a little wrong. I don't think they are wrong though, the electorate for certain noticed the chaos of the last year, and perhaps sense Sunak is not yet a fixture in the role. And while that remains in doubt, the dire ratings of the Tory party as a whole, and the worry what it might do next, are relevant to the polling. Even if Sunak retains OK ratimgs into 2024, defenestration anxiety could hold back voters from returning to the fold
It is either plain journalistic incompetence or it is corruption. I suspect the latter is the principal factor.
https://twitter.com/POLITlCSUK/status/1618293772181274624?s=20&t=agzo5xJu22lmGxXsBwlq9g
Bet there was something similar on the red side in 2019.
Some way to go before matching the Liberal Democrats in 2015 though...
https://www.pistonheads.com/news/ph-britishcars/bentley-celebrates-extraordinary-year/46686