For sure the Tory government under Rishi are smart enough to have war gamed this coming 24 months and know exactly what they are doing.
They know once inflation drops rapidly to 4% as every type of economist is agreed will happen this year, this tough stance now on pay rises from the government will be hailed for achieving the exciting inflation drop, and they will be chaired around the streets in triumph as true heirs of Lady Thatcher saviours of the nation for the inflation busting toughness they have shown. So by the time the election comes there will something akin to the unstoppable vaccine bounce or falklands factor going on.
This few months of bad polling will just be remembered as wee bit of mid term turbulence, like Lady Thatcher experienced before two huge landslide wins.
Nice piece of parody.
She’s right on one point though; this was how it felt to be in opposition during the Thatcher years, winning every contest that came by yet seeing her win every time the GE came. Thankfully there is no reason why history should retreat itself so precisely.
Along with everything else, the electoral calculus has changed massively.
Oh, I don’t share her analysis.
For one thing, despite their massive unpopularity among their enemies, which spread to many others during the midterms, the Tories back then did take care to create a stream of wins from things like selling off council houses, and the little bonanzas people got from buying underpriced privatisation shares. Who feels they are winning anything now?
Also, you had oil money going through, which helped a lot. No sign of a parallel now.
And, now, there's a flagship policy that is demonstrably not working and is increasingly unpopular - which is more resemblant of the poll tax period than of Thatcher at her peak.
The poll tax turned out to be ditchable.
Brexit would/will be much harder to unwind from a governance point of view. And whilst Brexit isn't working and is unpopular, there's still between a quarter and a third of voters keen on it, who are approximately the only people still voting blue.
For sure the Tory government under Rishi are smart enough to have war gamed this coming 24 months and know exactly what they are doing.
They know once inflation drops rapidly to 4% as every type of economist is agreed will happen this year, this tough stance now on pay rises from the government will be hailed for achieving the exciting inflation drop, and they will be chaired around the streets in triumph as true heirs of Lady Thatcher saviours of the nation for the inflation busting toughness they have shown. So by the time the election comes there will something akin to the unstoppable vaccine bounce or falklands factor going on.
This few months of bad polling will just be remembered as wee bit of mid term turbulence, like Lady Thatcher experienced before two huge landslide wins.
One of the most self-deluded posts in the history of pb.com.
Unless it's parody.
Sorry.
x
Have you never watched Fawlty Towers, with Basil exasperated about strikes making us sick man of Europe?
Seventies strikes perpetuated inflation, Lady Thatcher smashing strikes just like Rishi is doing, saved us from high inflation and being sick man of Europe.
You sure inflation won’t be 4% within the year, and Tories benefitting in polls from achieving that?
Inflation has been dead so long that even the people who should know about it - central bankers - have forgotten.
In the 80s it took a get deal of pain and time to squeeze inflation out of economies. This is where the Thatcher hatred came from, after all.
Even after the primary drivers of inflation drop back - fuel and imported materials (disrupted supply chains from COVID), the secondary effects send ripples through the economy - pay rises for example. It will take time for them to drop back. Then the price rises that higher pay awards will take time to stop rising…
It’s also arguable that we have forgotten how to fight inflation - by excluding housing costs, we relied on the collapse of consumer goods price (China) and services (low end jobs falling behind) to achieve the apparently low inflation.
But with double digit housing cost increases in many years - what was real inflation?
Also food. The price of bread doubled from 2001 to 2008. How do I know? Because I was an impoverished research student working five jobs to make ends meet and watching the pennies very carefully. I noticed that staples kept going up and up, so I had to work more hours to cover my basic bills.
You could also have mentioned council tax, of course, although as a student I was fortunately exempt from that.
For sure the Tory government under Rishi are smart enough to have war gamed this coming 24 months and know exactly what they are doing.
They know once inflation drops rapidly to 4% as every type of economist is agreed will happen this year, this tough stance now on pay rises from the government will be hailed for achieving the exciting inflation drop, and they will be chaired around the streets in triumph as true heirs of Lady Thatcher saviours of the nation for the inflation busting toughness they have shown. So by the time the election comes there will something akin to the unstoppable vaccine bounce or falklands factor going on.
This few months of bad polling will just be remembered as wee bit of mid term turbulence, like Lady Thatcher experienced before two huge landslide wins.
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
The question is what Sunak does next. He needs to persuade people to back the party. And yet: He can't sweep away the crooks and the bullies. He can't get past the stench of the sewer of open corruption. He is sticking to the "nurses are communists" play even though the support for the strikers remains solid. His ministers parrot the priorities that few agree with, and shows no sign of being able to deliver them.
We've just had @MoonRabbit say that not only will inflation collapse but people will thank the Tories for it. Real world inflation is well north of the official figure - so many key areas like food staples are a long way beyond. So there is a huuuuuge amount of contraction needed to hit a realised 4% as predicted.
Thing is, John Major's government actually did manage to turn around the economic shitshow caused by John Major's government. Things really did look rosy in the middle of the decade. Yet they didn't get the plaudits for this - because everyone was still stinging from the scars incurred during said shitshow.
We are deep in the latest shitshow. Even if over time things do improve, I expect the thanks the government gets to be more like John Major received than any Mills and Boon-style hazy love reimagining of "Lady" Thatcher.
Rubbish. The British problem is a total lack of self-awareness. Not humble bragging.
Imagine if, for example, Fred Goodwin, Mark James, Simon Case, Amanda Spielman, Suella Braverman or Liz Truss could understand their own abilities and weaknesses properly, so they could get jobs on their intellectual and moral level. What a boon that would be to the nation.
Americans don't mind failure and over ambition, as long as you try again.
You are just reinforcing the article, accept your station in life and don't brag as the British stereotype.
To be fair to Goodwin he did turn RBS from a small Scottish Bank to the biggest in the world at one point before the Crash
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
Well, it can be, in the right circumstances. I once had the unenviable task of telling a principal that after shouting and gesticulating at a member of staff a complaint of assault had been made against him. Because shouting is considered as such in certain contexts.
But, equally, it *may* have been an accurate remark. Indeed, recent experience suggests it probably was.
Perhaps the civil servant just wasn't used to (a) not being the one doing the shouting (b) being told he was talking rubbish. Many of them in my experience have the same snobbish attitudes to their intellect and experience we see from certain posters on this board - and with just as little justification.
On topic I am struggling to see anything that can change the Tories' fortunes. They have had another very long stint in power, by the election it will be 14 years. Inflation is going to fall and the economic outturn will be slightly better than forecast but everyone bar pensioners is going to have suffered yet another drop in real incomes as we try to adjust to what we actually earn as a country.
Very few are going to enjoy that process and the government will get the blame: after all it is hardly our fault that as a country we live on credit, beyond our means, selling off our assets to pay for imports and mortgaging our future income to maintain our current standard of living is it? Is it?
Then Labour will be in government and if they don't sort it out will get the blame in turn.
On topic I am struggling to see anything that can change the Tories' fortunes. They have had another very long stint in power, by the election it will be 14 years. Inflation is going to fall and the economic outturn will be slightly better than forecast but everyone bar pensioners is going to have suffered yet another drop in real incomes as we try to adjust to what we actually earn as a country.
Very few are going to enjoy that process and the government will get the blame: after all it is hardly our fault that as a country we live on credit, beyond our means, selling off our assets to pay for imports and mortgaging our future income to maintain our current standard of living is it? Is it?
Then Labour will be in government and if they don't sort it out will get the blame in turn.
Of course. And they won't, indeed such plans as they have seem to be focused on making it worse. More taxes on business, higher public spending even more focused on current spending, a total indifference to our terms of trade, etc etc.
Rubbish. The British problem is a total lack of self-awareness. Not humble bragging.
Imagine if, for example, Fred Goodwin, Mark James, Simon Case, Amanda Spielman, Suella Braverman or Liz Truss could understand their own abilities and weaknesses properly, so they could get jobs on their intellectual and moral level. What a boon that would be to the nation.
Americans don't mind failure and over ambition, as long as you try again.
You are just reinforcing the article, accept your station in life and don't brag as the British stereotype.
To be fair to Goodwin he did turn RBS from a small Scottish Bank to the biggest in the world at one point before the Crash
He was the one who crashed it through over expansion.
Your second sentence is even more nonsensical than your usual standard, which is saying something. It's so stupid - and rude, contrary to your claims about yourself - it's not even worth the dignity of dismissing.
Like I say - self awareness is needed. Particularly among snobs who think they're brilliant because they went to the 'right' uni and got a degree despite being ignorant, and so rise effortlessly to the top where they sod everything up.
They need to learn they are rubbish, rather than say they are brilliant. Humble bragging isn't the problem in our society.
Good piece, though (as you'd expect after a decade) bits of it haven't aged well. This in particular: …The assumption was that Hong Kong would soon become like the rest of China. This was entirely wrong. The political and legal structure of Hong Kong remains as different now from the rest of China as in 1997…
The "irreversible decline" of the US is, ironically in view of the thrust of the article, prejudice speaking.
Recent genetic studies of archaeological remains have shown this bit to be surprisingly true in terms of population genetic stability, over several millennia. ...Or consider a quite different example. Over 90 per cent of Chinese think of themselves as of one race, the Han..
The Tories are so obviously heading for a terrible defeat, the more interesting and live political question is, perhaps, how Starmer’s Labour will do in Scotland
That is much harder to call. The indyvoters provide a floor for Sturgeon… but she must be damaged by the Trans (sorry!) stuff
If Labour - as some sub samples suggest - go well over 30% of the Scottish vote they will surely start taking quite a few seats from the Nits. That will in turn have implications for Holyrood
Even in Scotland there cannot be more than 30% of the population as stupid as that.
What’s your sense of how the Trans shit is hurting Sturgeon? It looks pretty bad from the outside, but Scots politics are opaque, I readily admit. And Sturgeon has survived scandals - eg the Salmond Rape Affair - which would have utterly felled lesser politicos
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
The Tories are so obviously heading for a terrible defeat, the more interesting and live political question is, perhaps, how Starmer’s Labour will do in Scotland
That is much harder to call. The indyvoters provide a floor for Sturgeon… but she must be damaged by the Trans (sorry!) stuff
If Labour - as some sub samples suggest - go well over 30% of the Scottish vote they will surely start taking quite a few seats from the Nits. That will in turn have implications for Holyrood
Even in Scotland there cannot be more than 30% of the population as stupid as that.
I was thinking, on my walk to work yesterday, about Sturgeon's intention to run the next election as a de facto Indyref. If the SNP really go for this but then fall back into the 30s, I think Sturgeon could resign.
Of course, they might backtrack on the whole referendum thing if it starts to look like they'll fall back. In which case, I think it means that Sturgeon will try to keep going.
The question is what Sunak does next. He needs to persuade people to back the party. And yet: He can't sweep away the crooks and the bullies. He can't get past the stench of the sewer of open corruption. He is sticking to the "nurses are communists" play even though the support for the strikers remains solid. His ministers parrot the priorities that few agree with, and shows no sign of being able to deliver them.
We've just had @MoonRabbit say that not only will inflation collapse but people will thank the Tories for it. Real world inflation is well north of the official figure - so many key areas like food staples are a long way beyond. So there is a huuuuuge amount of contraction needed to hit a realised 4% as predicted.
Thing is, John Major's government actually did manage to turn around the economic shitshow caused by John Major's government. Things really did look rosy in the middle of the decade. Yet they didn't get the plaudits for this - because everyone was still stinging from the scars incurred during said shitshow.
We are deep in the latest shitshow. Even if over time things do improve, I expect the thanks the government gets to be more like John Major received than any Mills and Boon-style hazy love reimagining of "Lady" Thatcher.
I've noticed the inflation forecasts for late 2023 and 2024 are the optimistic Tories' weapon of choice. I even noted one Tory MP suggesting that to keep the peasants from revolting they should be given a one-off payment to shut their public sector working class traps. I am not sure Tory rampers including Ramping Rabbit have got the hang of the cumulative nature of inflation. So much for their expensive educations.
On topic I am struggling to see anything that can change the Tories' fortunes. They have had another very long stint in power, by the election it will be 14 years. Inflation is going to fall and the economic outturn will be slightly better than forecast but everyone bar pensioners is going to have suffered yet another drop in real incomes as we try to adjust to what we actually earn as a country.
Very few are going to enjoy that process and the government will get the blame: after all it is hardly our fault that as a country we live on credit, beyond our means, selling off our assets to pay for imports and mortgaging our future income to maintain our current standard of living is it? Is it?
Then Labour will be in government and if they don't sort it out will get the blame in turn.
One important difference, though.
"Sorting out the mess our predecessors left" gets the benefit of the doubt.
"Sorting out the mess that happened earlier in our term" doesn't.
The next election is Starmer's to lose. While I have some doubts about the extent of his abilities, I do not think that losing the next election is beyond him.
Sunak is in a bit of a pickle. The easiest way to demonstrate that he was a change with the recent Tory past, would be to pick a few fights with his backbenches in an attempt to convince the public that he was different and he would remake the Tory party in his image, one more to the public's liking. But Sunak's position within the party is far too weak to be able to attempt anything like that.
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
Well, it can be, in the right circumstances. I once had the unenviable task of telling a principal that after shouting and gesticulating at a member of staff a complaint of assault had been made against him. Because shouting is considered as such in certain contexts.
But, equally, it *may* have been an accurate remark. Indeed, recent experience suggests it probably was.
Perhaps the civil servant just wasn't used to (a) not being the one doing the shouting (b) being told he was talking rubbish. Many of them in my experience have the same snobbish attitudes to their intellect and experience we see from certain posters on this board - and with just as little justification.
I worked for a while at an oil company that almost took pride in being a bit civil service like.
They certainly hired quite a few civil servants. Who ranged from excellent to piss poor. “Legend in their own minds” seemed to be a theme among the most useless.
I think in the U.K. too, like the US we can overlook our strengths while overestimating our weaknesses.
Not the fatuous boosterism of Johnson, but in COVID we produced a vaccine that probably saved more lives than any other and identified the WHO adopted dexamethsone protocol - expanded globally which saved further lives. Meanwhile others were bickering about “quasi ineffective vaccines” or pushing ivermectin.
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
No. Barring a black swan the Tories are done. They have no record to run on aside from the increasingly unpopular "achievement" of Brexit. Sunak is proving disappointing but it's hard to see him getting replaced or indeed to figure out who would be doing better. Labour will probably win with a small majority, although they might fall short and equally they might do better than that.
So your prediction is that Labour might win big or might win small or might fall short and if there's a black swan the Tories might win?
Has Leon hacked your account? He at least spreads them over several posts...
Ha ha. The next general election is probably almost two years away, it's hard to be too sure at this stage. I've been consistent that I see a Labour majority as the most likely outcome, from way back when that wasn't the bookies' favourite, but I'd be lying if I said it was nailed on this far out from the election. As a professional forecaster I'm used to people who deal in distributions not point estimates!
Nice example of modern life and media today - the story about breaking in to homes to install prepayment meters.
British Gas are horrified that the outfits they outsource their dirty work to are doing exactly that.
The horrified media have no thoughts at all about how gas companies should be paid by people who do not intend to do so. And anyway profits are obscene.
Hard hit innocents from the deserving poor abound with their life histories.
The Tories are so obviously heading for a terrible defeat, the more interesting and live political question is, perhaps, how Starmer’s Labour will do in Scotland
That is much harder to call. The indyvoters provide a floor for Sturgeon… but she must be damaged by the Trans (sorry!) stuff
If Labour - as some sub samples suggest - go well over 30% of the Scottish vote they will surely start taking quite a few seats from the Nits. That will in turn have implications for Holyrood
Even in Scotland there cannot be more than 30% of the population as stupid as that.
I was thinking, on my walk to work yesterday, about Sturgeon's intention to run the next election as a de facto Indyref. If the SNP really go for this but then fall back into the 30s, I think Sturgeon could resign.
Of course, they might backtrack on the whole referendum thing if it starts to look like they'll fall back. In which case, I think it means that Sturgeon will try to keep going.
For sure the Tory government under Rishi are smart enough to have war gamed this coming 24 months and know exactly what they are doing.
They know once inflation drops rapidly to 4% as every type of economist is agreed will happen this year, this tough stance now on pay rises from the government will be hailed for achieving the exciting inflation drop, and they will be chaired around the streets in triumph as true heirs of Lady Thatcher saviours of the nation for the inflation busting toughness they have shown. So by the time the election comes there will something akin to the unstoppable vaccine bounce or falklands factor going on.
This few months of bad polling will just be remembered as wee bit of mid term turbulence, like Lady Thatcher experienced before two huge landslide wins.
Yes, a war with Argentina might work.
The Falklands may have increased the size of the victory. But the victory was certain from the writing of The Longest Suicide Note In Political History - aka the Labour Manifesto.
Which is why people with memories, in the Labour Party, reacted to Corbyn as they did.
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
No it isn't. The evangelical Welby will be gone in a year or 2, likely replaced as Archbishop of Canterbury by the Archbishop of York, the liberal Catholic Stephen Cottrell who has already said he will bless homosexual marriages.
Most of us in the Church of England have no problem with homosexual Christians getting married in the established church. It is only a minority of evangelicals who do and if they walk and leave the Church of England rather than accept even a compromise opt out as Anglo Catholics have over women priests and Bishops so be it.
Some parts of the Anglican Communion likes the US, Scotland and Wales already allow homosexual marriages anyway, it is not just the anti homosexual marriage African churches
The Tories are so obviously heading for a terrible defeat, the more interesting and live political question is, perhaps, how Starmer’s Labour will do in Scotland
That is much harder to call. The indyvoters provide a floor for Sturgeon… but she must be damaged by the Trans (sorry!) stuff
If Labour - as some sub samples suggest - go well over 30% of the Scottish vote they will surely start taking quite a few seats from the Nits. That will in turn have implications for Holyrood
Even in Scotland there cannot be more than 30% of the population as stupid as that.
I was thinking, on my walk to work yesterday, about Sturgeon's intention to run the next election as a de facto Indyref. If the SNP really go for this but then fall back into the 30s, I think Sturgeon could resign.
Of course, they might backtrack on the whole referendum thing if it starts to look like they'll fall back. In which case, I think it means that Sturgeon will try to keep going.
I am pretty certain they will fall back. Perhaps by not much, but they are at an absolute historic high, and Sturgeon will be four more years down the line by 2024, that much more shopworn and boring. I have seldom seen her as rattled as she has been during this Trans kerfuffle
My hunch is she will win in 2024 - ie take a modest hit but still come out well on top. And then she will resign and move to a kushti gig in the UN or UNESCO whatever. She must be annoyed she can’t be kicked upstairs to a nice overpaid job in the EU
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
The Tories are so obviously heading for a terrible defeat, the more interesting and live political question is, perhaps, how Starmer’s Labour will do in Scotland
That is much harder to call. The indyvoters provide a floor for Sturgeon… but she must be damaged by the Trans (sorry!) stuff
If Labour - as some sub samples suggest - go well over 30% of the Scottish vote they will surely start taking quite a few seats from the Nits. That will in turn have implications for Holyrood
Even in Scotland there cannot be more than 30% of the population as stupid as that.
What’s your sense of how the Trans shit is hurting Sturgeon? It looks pretty bad from the outside, but Scots politics are opaque, I readily admit. And Sturgeon has survived scandals - eg the Salmond Rape Affair - which would have utterly felled lesser politicos
When in doubt, assume that Sturgeon is going to be completely fine. Given the GRR didn't actually go through, I don't see how this will keep momentum (not to downplay the ongoing concerns of people like cyclefree). There is a Scottish Tavistock, which might lead to a few more stories.
I'm interested to see what she ends her political career with. The GE next year? The next Scottish elections (2026)?. Without an Indyref, she needs to find something big and positive to end with.
I'd suggest a new, highly protected Hebridean National Park. Or a radical land reform bill that grabs more of the big estates. A massive cycling revolution in our cities (we are actually quite densely populated up here, so would work)?
Sunak should stick to his course of getting borrowing down. The next general election still doesn't have to be called for nearly 2 years and he shouldn't take much notice of polls midterm. As Thatcher said if you are the governing party and lead the polls midterm you aren't taking the tough decisions necessary. She of course regularly trailed Foot and Kinnock midterm before winning the actual general election.
Then once the deficit has been cut he can look towards tax cuts before the general election. Brexit has been done so is less of a distraction as it was in the last Parliament, even if a deal over NI would help
He should also look to regular debates with Starmer, I suspect he will do quite well with them with the public. He won most of the leadership debates with the public last summer after all
The thing you have to remember about Sunak is who appointed him in the first place. Sunak, Truss, Raab, Braverman, etc, etc, were picked by Boris because they lacked ability and talent and therefore could be no threat to his power.
And bigging Sunak up for debates is lunacy. Truss wiped the floor with him. Little Miss Vacant-head...
We've just had @MoonRabbit say that not only will inflation collapse but people will thank the Tories for it. Real world inflation is well north of the official figure - so many key areas like food staples are a long way beyond. So there is a huuuuuge amount of contraction needed to hit a realised 4% as predicted.
...plus of course "inflation goes down to 4%" doesn't mean "prices go down to only 4% above their old levels circa 2021" or even "prices stop rising" -- it just means "prices rise a bit less fast and less obviously than they have been"...
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
No, it's a piece of disputed evidence.
Is it therefore bullshit?
You can have swearing without bullying, and bullying without swearing, of course. In this particular case it appears to be a part of the complaint against him that Raab has specifically denied, and therefore a test of whether or not he's being truthful..
Nice example of modern life and media today - the story about breaking in to homes to install prepayment meters.
British Gas are horrified that the outfits they outsource their dirty work to are doing exactly that.
The horrified media have no thoughts at all about how gas companies should be paid by people who do not intend to do so. And anyway profits are obscene.
Hard hit innocents from the deserving poor abound with their life histories.
The undeserving feckless get a free ride.
Good old modern Britain.
Given current energy prices, fitting a pre-payment meter is effectively disconnection for people on a low income.
The question is what Sunak does next. He needs to persuade people to back the party. And yet: He can't sweep away the crooks and the bullies. He can't get past the stench of the sewer of open corruption. He is sticking to the "nurses are communists" play even though the support for the strikers remains solid. His ministers parrot the priorities that few agree with, and shows no sign of being able to deliver them.
We've just had @MoonRabbit say that not only will inflation collapse but people will thank the Tories for it. Real world inflation is well north of the official figure - so many key areas like food staples are a long way beyond. So there is a huuuuuge amount of contraction needed to hit a realised 4% as predicted.
Thing is, John Major's government actually did manage to turn around the economic shitshow caused by John Major's government. Things really did look rosy in the middle of the decade. Yet they didn't get the plaudits for this - because everyone was still stinging from the scars incurred during said shitshow.
We are deep in the latest shitshow. Even if over time things do improve, I expect the thanks the government gets to be more like John Major received than any Mills and Boon-style hazy love reimagining of "Lady" Thatcher.
I've noticed the inflation forecasts for late 2023 and 2024 are the optimistic Tories' weapon of choice. I even noted one Tory MP suggesting that to keep the peasants from revolting they should be given a one-off payment to shut their public sector working class traps. I am not sure Tory rampers including Ramping Rabbit have got the hang of the cumulative nature of inflation. So much for their expensive educations.
Most public sector workers are middle class, more working class taxpayers who fund the public sector work in the private sector than public sector
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
On topic I am struggling to see anything that can change the Tories' fortunes. They have had another very long stint in power, by the election it will be 14 years. Inflation is going to fall and the economic outturn will be slightly better than forecast but everyone bar pensioners is going to have suffered yet another drop in real incomes as we try to adjust to what we actually earn as a country.
Very few are going to enjoy that process and the government will get the blame: after all it is hardly our fault that as a country we live on credit, beyond our means, selling off our assets to pay for imports and mortgaging our future income to maintain our current standard of living is it? Is it?
Then Labour will be in government and if they don't sort it out will get the blame in turn.
One important difference, though.
"Sorting out the mess our predecessors left" gets the benefit of the doubt.
"Sorting out the mess that happened earlier in our term" doesn't.
It might. As the sage Moonrabbit reminds us, Mrs Thatcher conquered inflation. Except the first thing she did was double VAT which spiked inflation, which she then conquered right back down almost to the rate she'd inherited from Labour. Yet everyone remembers that Mrs T did defeat inflation.
Of course, in 1997, Major did not get the credit for escaping the ERM he'd taken us into. Nor did Brown get much from not starting yet another war.
Rubbish. The British problem is a total lack of self-awareness. Not humble bragging.
Imagine if, for example, Fred Goodwin, Mark James, Simon Case, Amanda Spielman, Suella Braverman or Liz Truss could understand their own abilities and weaknesses properly, so they could get jobs on their intellectual and moral level. What a boon that would be to the nation.
Americans don't mind failure and over ambition, as long as you try again.
You are just reinforcing the article, accept your station in life and don't brag as the British stereotype.
To be fair to Goodwin he did turn RBS from a small Scottish Bank to the biggest in the world at one point before the Crash
He was the one who crashed it through over expansion.
Your second sentence is even more nonsensical than your usual standard, which is saying something. It's so stupid - and rude, contrary to your claims about yourself - it's not even worth the dignity of dismissing.
Like I say - self awareness is needed. Particularly among snobs who think they're brilliant because they went to the 'right' uni and got a degree despite being ignorant, and so rise effortlessly to the top where they sod everything up.
They need to learn they are rubbish, rather than say they are brilliant. Humble bragging isn't the problem in our society.
In your opinion virtually everybody is rubbish of course, apart from yourself!!
Using the following data - BoE base rate ; CPIH ; Nationwide HPI here's how a theoretical 100% mortgage at base rate + 1% (Yes yes I know those don't exist but it makes for a convienient comparison) paying over 25 years for an average house fares (In 2015 money)...
We're... back to 1991.
October 2007 was the peak, I've assumed 4% interest rates today.
Sunak should stick to his course of getting borrowing down. The next general election still doesn't have to be called for nearly 2 years and he shouldn't take much notice of polls midterm. As Thatcher said if you are the governing party and lead the polls midterm you aren't taking the tough decisions necessary. She of course regularly trailed Foot and Kinnock midterm before winning the actual general election.
Then once the deficit has been cut he can look towards tax cuts before the general election. Brexit has been done so is less of a distraction as it was in the last Parliament, even if a deal over NI would help
He should also look to regular debates with Starmer, I suspect he will do quite well with them with the public. He won most of the leadership debates with the public last summer after all
The thing you have to remember about Sunak is who appointed him in the first place. Sunak, Truss, Raab, Braverman, etc, etc, were picked by Boris because they lacked ability and talent and therefore could be no threat to his power.
And bigging Sunak up for debates is lunacy. Truss wiped the floor with him. Little Miss Vacant-head...
No she didn't, Sunak won the post debate polls in every debate with Truss the public watched
But Lady Thatcher beating inflation by being tough on strikes and becoming wildly popular for it, is not fiction though is it? It’s historical fact. With two years to general election this same fact can repeat itself, can it not?
The situations are totally different. Thatcher had made it her personal mission to free Britain from industrial strife (as she saw it) and she was right in that fight, front and centre. Rishi wants to emulate her, but he doesn't have the balls to be anywhere near the whiff of gunpowder, so he's turning down interviews and trying to palm it all off on the pay review body, the Health Sec, inflation - leaving a vacuum where the strikers are making all the arguments. Possibly he feels he lacks the moral authority to back tough pay deals because of his wife's immense wealth. He's probably right.
How can he shift the polls? Use the low expectations he's successfully set and begin exceeding them radically and noticeably. But I just don't think this lot are about good Government. Even little things like dropping Liz's childcare reforms to make childcare cheaper. They're not interested. You have a Chancellor who thinks 15% is the right level for Corporation tax, imposing a huge rise instead.
The Tories are so obviously heading for a terrible defeat, the more interesting and live political question is, perhaps, how Starmer’s Labour will do in Scotland
That is much harder to call. The indyvoters provide a floor for Sturgeon… but she must be damaged by the Trans (sorry!) stuff
If Labour - as some sub samples suggest - go well over 30% of the Scottish vote they will surely start taking quite a few seats from the Nits. That will in turn have implications for Holyrood
Even in Scotland there cannot be more than 30% of the population as stupid as that.
I was thinking, on my walk to work yesterday, about Sturgeon's intention to run the next election as a de facto Indyref. If the SNP really go for this but then fall back into the 30s, I think Sturgeon could resign.
Of course, they might backtrack on the whole referendum thing if it starts to look like they'll fall back. In which case, I think it means that Sturgeon will try to keep going.
They are already swithering on this. Use the 2026 Holyrood instead. Or the GE 24 as a vote for a referendum, not independence (so the standard policy position).
I would give no currency at all to the defacto referendum idea. No one except National readers take it seriously.
The Tories are so obviously heading for a terrible defeat, the more interesting and live political question is, perhaps, how Starmer’s Labour will do in Scotland
That is much harder to call. The indyvoters provide a floor for Sturgeon… but she must be damaged by the Trans (sorry!) stuff
If Labour - as some sub samples suggest - go well over 30% of the Scottish vote they will surely start taking quite a few seats from the Nits. That will in turn have implications for Holyrood
Even in Scotland there cannot be more than 30% of the population as stupid as that.
What’s your sense of how the Trans shit is hurting Sturgeon? It looks pretty bad from the outside, but Scots politics are opaque, I readily admit. And Sturgeon has survived scandals - eg the Salmond Rape Affair - which would have utterly felled lesser politicos
When in doubt, assume that Sturgeon is going to be completely fine. Given the GRR didn't actually go through, I don't see how this will keep momentum (not to downplay the ongoing concerns of people like cyclefree). There is a Scottish Tavistock, which might lead to a few more stories.
I'm interested to see what she ends her political career with. The GE next year? The next Scottish elections (2026)?. Without an Indyref, she needs to find something big and positive to end with.
I'd suggest a new, highly protected Hebridean National Park. Or a radical land reform bill that grabs more of the big estates. A massive cycling revolution in our cities (we are actually quite densely populated up here, so would work)?
Yes, she will need some kind of high point at which to quit, and it is not gonna be indy. I guess her big hope is that she has some control over a hung-ish parliament with Starmer as a NOM PM
Then she could demand, say, Single Market status as the price of Coalition. Because Starmer won’t grant a referendum but he would be quite keen to have an “excuse” to get the UK back in the SM
That would be a fine end-of-career positive result for Sturgeon. Majorly popular in Scotland. Leaves her with a massive achievement. The woman who half reversed Brexit! Exit to a lovely new job, perhaps in EFTA or whatever
Trouble is Starmer - I reckon - is going to get an absolute majority, and won’t need her
Not sure the marble is going to roll towards CON again.
Even though inflation may be back to 3% by GE time late 2024 we would have had lots of accumulated inflation which will have eroded the value of people's savings earnings and pensions. Not all pensions are fully indexed linked against CPI!
Most private sector pensions are capped - typically 5%.
Even if inflation is down I suspect it will be “Thank you for your service. NEXT!
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
Sounds like a lot of pampered southern snowflakes unable to accept that they are crap to me.
That's not what it's about.
As the former head of the Civil Service said in an interview last night, civil servants aren't bothered by robust language from ministers; indeed they expect it. (Edit) The alleged bullying in this case is about the systematic, targeted professional undermining of particular individual subordinates.
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
The majority of the Anglican Communion is in Africa which is anti gay marriage.
However the argument is disestablishment of the Church of England from some liberals like TSE if it puts preserving the Anglican Communion ahead of aligning the established church with English law which allows homosexual marriage.
In reality however if Labour got in changing the homosexual marriage Act to force the established Church of England to conduct homosexual marriages with no opt out (even for evangelicals) would be more effective in getting what they want than disestablishment (which would still see zero homosexual marriages in Church of England churches if Synod had not approved them and Welby was still Archbishop and put preservation of the Anglican Communion first).
The Anglican Communion is only a recent invention anyway, 1867 when most African nations had Queen Victoria as their head of state and effectively head of their emerging Anglican churches too. Charles is now not King or head of the Church of a single African nation. The Church of England however has been the established Church since Henry VIII broke with Rome in 1534
The Tories are so obviously heading for a terrible defeat, the more interesting and live political question is, perhaps, how Starmer’s Labour will do in Scotland
That is much harder to call. The indyvoters provide a floor for Sturgeon… but she must be damaged by the Trans (sorry!) stuff
If Labour - as some sub samples suggest - go well over 30% of the Scottish vote they will surely start taking quite a few seats from the Nits. That will in turn have implications for Holyrood
Even in Scotland there cannot be more than 30% of the population as stupid as that.
I was thinking, on my walk to work yesterday, about Sturgeon's intention to run the next election as a de facto Indyref. If the SNP really go for this but then fall back into the 30s, I think Sturgeon could resign.
Of course, they might backtrack on the whole referendum thing if it starts to look like they'll fall back. In which case, I think it means that Sturgeon will try to keep going.
They are already swithering on this. Use the 2026 Holyrood instead. Or the GE 24 as a vote for a referendum, not independence (so the standard policy position).
I would give no currency at all to the defacto referendum idea. No one except National readers take it seriously.
Ah, I had missed this! It suddenly struck me, with polls going the way they were, talk of a fakearendum had boxed the SNP in to an awkward corner. Still, if the base take it seriously, that could bring about other problems. r/scotland seem pretty keen on the fake referendum idea too.
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
He evidently believes that gay marriage is not something he will die in a ditch for/fracture the global anglican community. As it stands, statute law follows canon law on this hence it is illegal (in statute law) for same sex marriage to be carried out in a CoE church or by its ministers. That is because as the established church everyone has a legal right to be married in a CoE church as long as they abide by the CoE's rules.
If the CoE were to disestablish then there would no longer be the legal right to be married in a CoE church (or by a CoE minister, nota bene @HYUFD).
So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
No, it's a piece of disputed evidence.
Is it therefore bullshit?
You can have swearing without bullying, and bullying without swearing, of course. In this particular case it appears to be a part of the complaint against him that Raab has specifically denied, and therefore a test of whether or not he's being truthful..
Sir Bernard Jenkins put it well yesterday on WatO: "Man up, Princess." (I paraphrase.)
Nice example of modern life and media today - the story about breaking in to homes to install prepayment meters.
British Gas are horrified that the outfits they outsource their dirty work to are doing exactly that.
The horrified media have no thoughts at all about how gas companies should be paid by people who do not intend to do so. And anyway profits are obscene.
Hard hit innocents from the deserving poor abound with their life histories.
The undeserving feckless get a free ride.
Good old modern Britain.
Given current energy prices, fitting a pre-payment meter is effectively disconnection for people on a low income.
Helped by the tenant of the New Religion - all must have The New Idol. A Smart meter.
It is fascinating how the Jobsworths take an idea and turn it into a sacred law.
Sunak should stick to his course of getting borrowing down. The next general election still doesn't have to be called for nearly 2 years and he shouldn't take much notice of polls midterm. As Thatcher said if you are the governing party and lead the polls midterm you aren't taking the tough decisions necessary. She of course regularly trailed Foot and Kinnock midterm before winning the actual general election.
Then once the deficit has been cut he can look towards tax cuts before the general election. Brexit has been done so is less of a distraction as it was in the last Parliament, even if a deal over NI would help
He should also look to regular debates with Starmer, I suspect he will do quite well with them with the public. He won most of the leadership debates with the public last summer after all
The thing you have to remember about Sunak is who appointed him in the first place. Sunak, Truss, Raab, Braverman, etc, etc, were picked by Boris because they lacked ability and talent and therefore could be no threat to his power.
And bigging Sunak up for debates is lunacy. Truss wiped the floor with him. Little Miss Vacant-head...
No she didn't, Sunak won the post debate polls in every debate with Truss the public watched
I see... he won so often he lost the leadership contest.
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
He evidently believes that gay marriage is not something he will die in a ditch for/fracture the global anglican community. As it stands, statute law follows canon law on this hence it is illegal (in statute law) for same sex marriage to be carried out in a CoE church or by its ministers. That is because as the established church everyone has a legal right to be married in a CoE church as long as they abide by the CoE's rules.
If the CoE were to disestablish then there would no longer be the legal right to be married in a CoE church (or by a CoE minister, nota bene @HYUFD).
So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
Which unfortunately for Welby is an attitude likely to see his facing a swifter removal than he hoped for and replacement by a more liberal Archbishop of Canterbury, given most Anglicans in England now back homosexual marriage
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
..So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
If doing so would split the Anglican Church.
I don't think he's personally so strongly opposed to the change.
On topic I am struggling to see anything that can change the Tories' fortunes. They have had another very long stint in power, by the election it will be 14 years. Inflation is going to fall and the economic outturn will be slightly better than forecast but everyone bar pensioners is going to have suffered yet another drop in real incomes as we try to adjust to what we actually earn as a country.
Very few are going to enjoy that process and the government will get the blame: after all it is hardly our fault that as a country we live on credit, beyond our means, selling off our assets to pay for imports and mortgaging our future income to maintain our current standard of living is it? Is it?
Then Labour will be in government and if they don't sort it out will get the blame in turn.
Does it work like that? I am not sure it does. Thatcher often got the benefit of the doubt through the 80s as the narrative of the Winter of Discontent had been carefully cultivated by the Tories. Cameron did it to great effect after the sub- prime crisis, pinning the blame personally on Brown. The notion that it one has to break eggs to make an omelette and it takes a while to turn the supertanker around is compelling.
I am not sure Labour have made enough effort yet to put that idea in voter consciousness. Starmer should be meeting with Blair, Campbell and Mandelson on a daily basis. Although to be fair the current Government are making their own case for defeat.
The question is what Sunak does next. He needs to persuade people to back the party. And yet: He can't sweep away the crooks and the bullies. He can't get past the stench of the sewer of open corruption. He is sticking to the "nurses are communists" play even though the support for the strikers remains solid. His ministers parrot the priorities that few agree with, and shows no sign of being able to deliver them.
We've just had @MoonRabbit say that not only will inflation collapse but people will thank the Tories for it. Real world inflation is well north of the official figure - so many key areas like food staples are a long way beyond. So there is a huuuuuge amount of contraction needed to hit a realised 4% as predicted.
Thing is, John Major's government actually did manage to turn around the economic shitshow caused by John Major's government. Things really did look rosy in the middle of the decade. Yet they didn't get the plaudits for this - because everyone was still stinging from the scars incurred during said shitshow.
We are deep in the latest shitshow. Even if over time things do improve, I expect the thanks the government gets to be more like John Major received than any Mills and Boon-style hazy love reimagining of "Lady" Thatcher.
I've noticed the inflation forecasts for late 2023 and 2024 are the optimistic Tories' weapon of choice. I even noted one Tory MP suggesting that to keep the peasants from revolting they should be given a one-off payment to shut their public sector working class traps. I am not sure Tory rampers including Ramping Rabbit have got the hang of the cumulative nature of inflation. So much for their expensive educations.
Most public sector workers are middle class, more working class taxpayers who fund the public sector work in the private sector than public sector
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
Sounds like a lot of pampered southern snowflakes unable to accept that they are crap to me.
That's not what it's about.
As the former head of the Civil Service said in an interview last night, civil servants aren't bothered by robust language from ministers; indeed they expect it. (Edit) The alleged bullying in this case is about the systematic, targeted professional undermining of particular individual subordinates.
Workplace bullying isn't a joke. Anyone who has experienced it knows that it can be completely debilitating. I don't think there is any excuse for it at all.
The Tories are so obviously heading for a terrible defeat, the more interesting and live political question is, perhaps, how Starmer’s Labour will do in Scotland
That is much harder to call. The indyvoters provide a floor for Sturgeon… but she must be damaged by the Trans (sorry!) stuff
If Labour - as some sub samples suggest - go well over 30% of the Scottish vote they will surely start taking quite a few seats from the Nits. That will in turn have implications for Holyrood
Even in Scotland there cannot be more than 30% of the population as stupid as that.
What’s your sense of how the Trans shit is hurting Sturgeon? It looks pretty bad from the outside, but Scots politics are opaque, I readily admit. And Sturgeon has survived scandals - eg the Salmond Rape Affair - which would have utterly felled lesser politicos
When in doubt, assume that Sturgeon is going to be completely fine. Given the GRR didn't actually go through, I don't see how this will keep momentum (not to downplay the ongoing concerns of people like cyclefree). There is a Scottish Tavistock, which might lead to a few more stories.
I'm interested to see what she ends her political career with. The GE next year? The next Scottish elections (2026)?. Without an Indyref, she needs to find something big and positive to end with.
I'd suggest a new, highly protected Hebridean National Park. Or a radical land reform bill that grabs more of the big estates. A massive cycling revolution in our cities (we are actually quite densely populated up here, so would work)?
Yes, she will need some kind of high point at which to quit, and it is not gonna be indy. I guess her big hope is that she has some control over a hung-ish parliament with Starmer as a NOM PM
Then she could demand, say, Single Market status as the price of Coalition. Because Starmer won’t grant a referendum but he would be quite keen to have an “excuse” to get the UK back in the SM
That would be a fine end-of-career positive result for Sturgeon. Majorly popular in Scotland. Leaves her with a massive achievement. The woman who half reversed Brexit! Exit to a lovely new job, perhaps in EFTA or whatever
Trouble is Starmer - I reckon - is going to get an absolute majority, and won’t need her
The other problem Sturgeon’s got is that a lot of her pitch is “keep the Toreeees out!”. With the Tories on the way out anyway, do voters seriously think she’d vote to bring down a Labour government? (Ones with long memories might - ed.) Starmer could simply call her bluff.
@Pagan2@dixiedean@HYUFD@DJ41a sorry to miss an interesting discussion on education last night, I took myself to bed. I agree with (bits of) all of your posts.
Rubbish. The British problem is a total lack of self-awareness. Not humble bragging.
Imagine if, for example, Fred Goodwin, Mark James, Simon Case, Amanda Spielman, Suella Braverman or Liz Truss could understand their own abilities and weaknesses properly, so they could get jobs on their intellectual and moral level. What a boon that would be to the nation.
Americans don't mind failure and over ambition, as long as you try again.
You are just reinforcing the article, accept your station in life and don't brag as the British stereotype.
To be fair to Goodwin he did turn RBS from a small Scottish Bank to the biggest in the world at one point before the Crash
He was the one who crashed it through over expansion.
Your second sentence is even more nonsensical than your usual standard, which is saying something. It's so stupid - and rude, contrary to your claims about yourself - it's not even worth the dignity of dismissing.
Like I say - self awareness is needed. Particularly among snobs who think they're brilliant because they went to the 'right' uni and got a degree despite being ignorant, and so rise effortlessly to the top where they sod everything up.
They need to learn they are rubbish, rather than say they are brilliant. Humble bragging isn't the problem in our society.
In your opinion virtually everybody is rubbish of course, apart from yourself!!
No Hyufd, that's what *you* think. Which is why you keep telling people you're right even when you're wrong. Again, we come back to lack of self-awareness being an issue.
I think our government and politicians are rubbish because, objectively, they are. Again, that's probably what comes across most strongly on here because that's what we discuss. I don't think that of everyone. Quite the contrary, as a teacher I'm trained to see the best in people, and my ability to do so is why I was and am good at it. I just tend to assess people on their abilities and see no reason for pious platitudes where I see idiocy marred by arrogance.
Yes, of course the likes of Spielman and Gibb are stupider and more ignorant than me in educational matters as well, simply due to force of genetics and background, but in a sense that's beside the point. It doesn't matter if they're not as intellectually forceful or knowledgeable as me, because the question is whether despite that they're competent to do their jobs. Which many people would be, but they are not.
However, you think such people must be wonderful because they got good grades and went to the Russell Group. It's called 'snobbery.'
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
He evidently believes that gay marriage is not something he will die in a ditch for/fracture the global anglican community. As it stands, statute law follows canon law on this hence it is illegal (in statute law) for same sex marriage to be carried out in a CoE church or by its ministers. That is because as the established church everyone has a legal right to be married in a CoE church as long as they abide by the CoE's rules.
If the CoE were to disestablish then there would no longer be the legal right to be married in a CoE church (or by a CoE minister, nota bene @HYUFD).
So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
Which unfortunately for Welby is an attitude likely to see his facing a swifter removal than he hoped for and replacement by a more liberal Archbishop of Canterbury, given most Anglicans in England now back homosexual marriage
Nice example of modern life and media today - the story about breaking in to homes to install prepayment meters.
British Gas are horrified that the outfits they outsource their dirty work to are doing exactly that.
The horrified media have no thoughts at all about how gas companies should be paid by people who do not intend to do so. And anyway profits are obscene.
Hard hit innocents from the deserving poor abound with their life histories.
The undeserving feckless get a free ride.
Good old modern Britain.
Given current energy prices, fitting a pre-payment meter is effectively disconnection for people on a low income.
Was a bit surprised to hear courts grant 99% of applications. Indicates the circs of the person being fitted with the meter don't have a particularly high priority in any decision.
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
No, it's a piece of disputed evidence.
Is it therefore bullshit?
You can have swearing without bullying, and bullying without swearing, of course. In this particular case it appears to be a part of the complaint against him that Raab has specifically denied, and therefore a test of whether or not he's being truthful..
Sir Bernard Jenkins put it well yesterday on WatO: "Man up, Princess." (I paraphrase.)
Jenkin.
Also apparently missing the point. Deliberately or otherwise.
"Astounding’: Elizabeth line hits 100m passengers eight months after opening ‘Busy Lizzie’ has raised £50m in additional fares for TfL and become busiest rail line in UK"
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
..So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
If doing so would split the Anglican Church.
I don't think he's personally so strongly opposed to the change.
Well yes I am not privy to his private thoughts about the matter but it didn't read like that but yes, it could be read as we are going to have same sex marriage to hell with the global anglican community...
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
No, it's a piece of disputed evidence.
Is it therefore bullshit?
You can have swearing without bullying, and bullying without swearing, of course. In this particular case it appears to be a part of the complaint against him that Raab has specifically denied, and therefore a test of whether or not he's being truthful..
Sir Bernard Jenkins put it well yesterday on WatO: "Man up, Princess." (I paraphrase.)
Jenkin.
Also apparently missing the point. Deliberately or otherwise.
He was saying without saying that senior civil servants should expect "robust" behaviour from their ministers. ie, Man up, Princess.
Whether he is right or wrong or missing the point I can't say.
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
Sounds like a lot of pampered southern snowflakes unable to accept that they are crap to me.
That's not what it's about.
As the former head of the Civil Service said in an interview last night, civil servants aren't bothered by robust language from ministers; indeed they expect it. (Edit) The alleged bullying in this case is about the systematic, targeted professional undermining of particular individual subordinates.
Workplace bullying isn't a joke. Anyone who has experienced it knows that it can be completely debilitating. I don't think there is any excuse for it at all.
I have been involved in investigating it.
It's very far from a joke, and those in the organisation not subject to it are often completely oblivious to its going on (and others turn a blind eye).
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
He evidently believes that gay marriage is not something he will die in a ditch for/fracture the global anglican community. As it stands, statute law follows canon law on this hence it is illegal (in statute law) for same sex marriage to be carried out in a CoE church or by its ministers. That is because as the established church everyone has a legal right to be married in a CoE church as long as they abide by the CoE's rules.
If the CoE were to disestablish then there would no longer be the legal right to be married in a CoE church (or by a CoE minister, nota bene @HYUFD).
So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
Which unfortunately for Welby is an attitude likely to see his facing a swifter removal than he hoped for and replacement by a more liberal Archbishop of Canterbury, given most Anglicans in England now back homosexual marriage
It seems so but I suppose you don't want to be the Archbishop that oversees disestablishment and a fracture of the global anglican community.
You can't have both.
Either one or the other. If the Church of England doesn't allow homosexual marriage still the African churches would stay but at the risk of disestablishment (or a Labour government forcing the established church to conducting homosexual marriages anyway with no opt out for evangelicals).
In any case the Anglican Communion is already split as the US, Welsh and Scottish provinces allow homosexual marriages and ignore what the African churches say. With a few Conservative Anglicans having left the Episcopalian Church to form The Anglican Church of North America which joined the anti gay marriage GAFCON with some African and Asian Anglican churches
The Tories are so obviously heading for a terrible defeat, the more interesting and live political question is, perhaps, how Starmer’s Labour will do in Scotland
That is much harder to call. The indyvoters provide a floor for Sturgeon… but she must be damaged by the Trans (sorry!) stuff
If Labour - as some sub samples suggest - go well over 30% of the Scottish vote they will surely start taking quite a few seats from the Nits. That will in turn have implications for Holyrood
Even in Scotland there cannot be more than 30% of the population as stupid as that.
I was thinking, on my walk to work yesterday, about Sturgeon's intention to run the next election as a de facto Indyref. If the SNP really go for this but then fall back into the 30s, I think Sturgeon could resign.
Of course, they might backtrack on the whole referendum thing if it starts to look like they'll fall back. In which case, I think it means that Sturgeon will try to keep going.
They are already swithering on this. Use the 2026 Holyrood instead. Or the GE 24 as a vote for a referendum, not independence (so the standard policy position).
I would give no currency at all to the defacto referendum idea. No one except National readers take it seriously.
Ah, I had missed this! It suddenly struck me, with polls going the way they were, talk of a fakearendum had boxed the SNP in to an awkward corner. Still, if the base take it seriously, that could bring about other problems. r/scotland seem pretty keen on the fake referendum idea too.
If you're ever bored, innocently post some figures from GERS onto r/Scotland and grab the popcorn.
"Astounding’: Elizabeth line hits 100m passengers eight months after opening ‘Busy Lizzie’ has raised £50m in additional fares for TfL and become busiest rail line in UK"
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
No, it's a piece of disputed evidence.
Is it therefore bullshit?
You can have swearing without bullying, and bullying without swearing, of course. In this particular case it appears to be a part of the complaint against him that Raab has specifically denied, and therefore a test of whether or not he's being truthful..
Sir Bernard Jenkins put it well yesterday on WatO: "Man up, Princess." (I paraphrase.)
Jenkin.
Also apparently missing the point. Deliberately or otherwise.
He was saying without saying that senior civil servants should expect "robust" behaviour from their ministers. ie, Man up, Princess...
Rubbish. The British problem is a total lack of self-awareness. Not humble bragging.
Imagine if, for example, Fred Goodwin, Mark James, Simon Case, Amanda Spielman, Suella Braverman or Liz Truss could understand their own abilities and weaknesses properly, so they could get jobs on their intellectual and moral level. What a boon that would be to the nation.
Americans don't mind failure and over ambition, as long as you try again.
You are just reinforcing the article, accept your station in life and don't brag as the British stereotype.
To be fair to Goodwin he did turn RBS from a small Scottish Bank to the biggest in the world at one point before the Crash
He was the one who crashed it through over expansion.
Your second sentence is even more nonsensical than your usual standard, which is saying something. It's so stupid - and rude, contrary to your claims about yourself - it's not even worth the dignity of dismissing.
Like I say - self awareness is needed. Particularly among snobs who think they're brilliant because they went to the 'right' uni and got a degree despite being ignorant, and so rise effortlessly to the top where they sod everything up.
They need to learn they are rubbish, rather than say they are brilliant. Humble bragging isn't the problem in our society.
In your opinion virtually everybody is rubbish of course, apart from yourself!!
You say the same to me when you lose an argument and you always blame it on you being the only Tory here, even when the disagreement has nothing whatsoever to do with politics.
You are the classic of what @ydoethur describes. You have no self awareness whatsoever and can never accept you are ever wrong. You often for instance completely misunderstand posts and are unaware you have done so in particular when someone is being sarcastic or ironic.
Sunak should stick to his course of getting borrowing down. The next general election still doesn't have to be called for nearly 2 years and he shouldn't take much notice of polls midterm. As Thatcher said if you are the governing party and lead the polls midterm you aren't taking the tough decisions necessary. She of course regularly trailed Foot and Kinnock midterm before winning the actual general election.
Then once the deficit has been cut he can look towards tax cuts before the general election. Brexit has been done so is less of a distraction as it was in the last Parliament, even if a deal over NI would help
He should also look to regular debates with Starmer, I suspect he will do quite well with them with the public. He won most of the leadership debates with the public last summer after all
The thing you have to remember about Sunak is who appointed him in the first place. Sunak, Truss, Raab, Braverman, etc, etc, were picked by Boris because they lacked ability and talent and therefore could be no threat to his power.
And bigging Sunak up for debates is lunacy. Truss wiped the floor with him. Little Miss Vacant-head...
No she didn't, Sunak won the post debate polls in every debate with Truss the public watched
I see... he won so often he lost the leadership contest.
The public wanted Sunak not Truss, as did Tory MPs, only a narrow majority of Tory members backed Truss
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
..So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
If doing so would split the Anglican Church.
I don't think he's personally so strongly opposed to the change.
Well yes I am not privy to his private thoughts about the matter but it didn't read like that but yes, it could be read as we are going to have same sex marriage to hell with the global anglican community...
Rather that he doesn't care much one way or the other about the policy, but cares a great deal about the maintenance of the global anglican communion.
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
..So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
If doing so would split the Anglican Church.
I don't think he's personally so strongly opposed to the change.
The strand of evangelicalism Welby comes from has quietly moved with the public mood on the issue- partly I'm sure because the hard-line approach puts off quite a lot of potential converts.
But yes, breaking up the Anglican communion would be a fateful step and that does give those who believe in the status quo something approaching a veto right now. (What's interesting to me is that some conservative evangelicals clearly want a separate church within the church and ate a bit frustrated that the current plans don't really justify that.)
But while Steveybabes (as he is still known in the vestries of Essex and East London) is definitely more pro change, that doesn't by itself change much. The AbofC isn't the Pope.
On Raab, I knew someone who worked in his private office a while back. She said he was impressive intellectually, and thought he was very capable. She also said he was a nasty man to work for and she was glad she switched jobs away from him.
The civil servants who have complained about Raab will have worked with probably hundreds of Ministers - but Raab is the one facing widespread complaints.
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
..So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
If doing so would split the Anglican Church.
I don't think he's personally so strongly opposed to the change.
Well yes I am not privy to his private thoughts about the matter but it didn't read like that but yes, it could be read as we are going to have same sex marriage to hell with the global anglican community...
Wasnt much point in all that churching if they go to hell anyway.
Nice example of modern life and media today - the story about breaking in to homes to install prepayment meters.
British Gas are horrified that the outfits they outsource their dirty work to are doing exactly that.
The horrified media have no thoughts at all about how gas companies should be paid by people who do not intend to do so. And anyway profits are obscene.
Hard hit innocents from the deserving poor abound with their life histories.
The undeserving feckless get a free ride.
Good old modern Britain.
Given current energy prices, fitting a pre-payment meter is effectively disconnection for people on a low income.
Was a bit surprised to hear courts grant 99% of applications. Indicates the circs of the person being fitted with the meter don't have a particularly high priority in any decision.
I can't immediately find it, but there was a news story a couple of months ago that covered the process and it was no more than a rubber stamping of dozens of warrents as a batch. By phone.
"Astounding’: Elizabeth line hits 100m passengers eight months after opening ‘Busy Lizzie’ has raised £50m in additional fares for TfL and become busiest rail line in UK"
It really does make the politicians who rejected in the 90s, delaying its introduction by 10-15 years, look quite bad.
Lessons for HS2.
Exactly. Just get on with it, and create a pipeline of infrastructure projects to crack on with. If we want the economy to grow we need to create the infrastructure for that to happen.
Rubbish. The British problem is a total lack of self-awareness. Not humble bragging.
Imagine if, for example, Fred Goodwin, Mark James, Simon Case, Amanda Spielman, Suella Braverman or Liz Truss could understand their own abilities and weaknesses properly, so they could get jobs on their intellectual and moral level. What a boon that would be to the nation.
Americans don't mind failure and over ambition, as long as you try again.
You are just reinforcing the article, accept your station in life and don't brag as the British stereotype.
To be fair to Goodwin he did turn RBS from a small Scottish Bank to the biggest in the world at one point before the Crash
He was the one who crashed it through over expansion.
Your second sentence is even more nonsensical than your usual standard, which is saying something. It's so stupid - and rude, contrary to your claims about yourself - it's not even worth the dignity of dismissing.
Like I say - self awareness is needed. Particularly among snobs who think they're brilliant because they went to the 'right' uni and got a degree despite being ignorant, and so rise effortlessly to the top where they sod everything up.
They need to learn they are rubbish, rather than say they are brilliant. Humble bragging isn't the problem in our society.
In your opinion virtually everybody is rubbish of course, apart from yourself!!
You say the same to me when you lose an argument and you always blame it on you being the only Tory here, even when the disagreement has nothing whatsoever to do with politics.
You are the classic of what @ydoethur describes. You have no self awareness whatsoever and can never accept you are ever wrong. You often for instance completely misunderstand posts and are unaware you have done so in particular when someone is being sarcastic or ironic.
I am certainly not going to concede to you and Ydoethur as you are amongst the rudest and most pompous posters on here, even Charles was never as self regarding as you 2 often are.
I did concede to Horse a point yesterday, as he is at least polite to me even if we differ politically
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
..So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
If doing so would split the Anglican Church.
I don't think he's personally so strongly opposed to the change.
Well yes I am not privy to his private thoughts about the matter but it didn't read like that but yes, it could be read as we are going to have same sex marriage to hell with the global anglican community...
Rather that he doesn't care much one way or the other about the policy, but cares a great deal about the maintenance of the global anglican communion.
Surely the global anglican community (GAC henceforth) is about ideological guidance or it is nothing.
He can't just not care about any particular issue.
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
He evidently believes that gay marriage is not something he will die in a ditch for/fracture the global anglican community. As it stands, statute law follows canon law on this hence it is illegal (in statute law) for same sex marriage to be carried out in a CoE church or by its ministers. That is because as the established church everyone has a legal right to be married in a CoE church as long as they abide by the CoE's rules.
If the CoE were to disestablish then there would no longer be the legal right to be married in a CoE church (or by a CoE minister, nota bene @HYUFD).
So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
Which unfortunately for Welby is an attitude likely to see his facing a swifter removal than he hoped for and replacement by a more liberal Archbishop of Canterbury, given most Anglicans in England now back homosexual marriage
It seems so but I suppose you don't want to be the Archbishop that oversees disestablishment and a fracture of the global anglican community.
FWIW I don't think disestablishment is on the horizon. As to gay marriage opt out, this just follows the long and statutory right of vicars not to conduct remarriages, which causes little controversy.
The structural breakup of the worldwide Anglican communion would hardly be noticed in England. Few think about it much, and most links have nothing to do with its formal 'communion' nature.
English disestablishment has four big obstacles:
It removes public rights to access their parish church
It is legislatively very complex and far reaching, with loads of implications for the constitution. It is fruitless bother.
It alters, desacralises and marginalises the nature of our monarchy as it has existed since the 1540s.
No politician or AoC wants to be the one to be accountable for the change.
Rubbish. The British problem is a total lack of self-awareness. Not humble bragging.
Imagine if, for example, Fred Goodwin, Mark James, Simon Case, Amanda Spielman, Suella Braverman or Liz Truss could understand their own abilities and weaknesses properly, so they could get jobs on their intellectual and moral level. What a boon that would be to the nation.
Americans don't mind failure and over ambition, as long as you try again.
You are just reinforcing the article, accept your station in life and don't brag as the British stereotype.
To be fair to Goodwin he did turn RBS from a small Scottish Bank to the biggest in the world at one point before the Crash
He was the one who crashed it through over expansion.
Your second sentence is even more nonsensical than your usual standard, which is saying something. It's so stupid - and rude, contrary to your claims about yourself - it's not even worth the dignity of dismissing.
Like I say - self awareness is needed. Particularly among snobs who think they're brilliant because they went to the 'right' uni and got a degree despite being ignorant, and so rise effortlessly to the top where they sod everything up.
They need to learn they are rubbish, rather than say they are brilliant. Humble bragging isn't the problem in our society.
In your opinion virtually everybody is rubbish of course, apart from yourself!!
You say the same to me when you lose an argument and you always blame it on you being the only Tory here, even when the disagreement has nothing whatsoever to do with politics.
You are the classic of what @ydoethur describes. You have no self awareness whatsoever and can never accept you are ever wrong. You often for instance completely misunderstand posts and are unaware you have done so in particular when someone is being sarcastic or ironic.
I am certainly not going to concede to you and Ydoethur as you are amongst the rudest and most pompous posters on here, even Charles was never as self regarding as you 2 often are.
I did concede to Horse a point yesterday, as he is at least polite to me even if we differ politically
Hyufd, I speak to you exactly the way you speak to me, only far more generously and with accuracy on my side (if I'm wrong I'm not afraid to say so).
If you feel I am rude and pompous, maybe consider how you are coming across.
"Astounding’: Elizabeth line hits 100m passengers eight months after opening ‘Busy Lizzie’ has raised £50m in additional fares for TfL and become busiest rail line in UK"
However, Mr Lord said there was little evidence of the Elizabeth line having “cannibalised” Tube passengers – meaning it has encouraged new journeys or attracted customers from the mainline railways.
Now, actually, taking pressure off the Central Line was part of the idea, but it's good if the line is generating new traffic too.
"Astounding’: Elizabeth line hits 100m passengers eight months after opening ‘Busy Lizzie’ has raised £50m in additional fares for TfL and become busiest rail line in UK"
It really does make the politicians who rejected in the 90s, delaying its introduction by 10-15 years, look quite bad.
Lessons for HS2.
Exactly. Just get on with it, and create a pipeline of infrastructure projects to crack on with. If we want the economy to grow we need to create the infrastructure for that to happen.
That's a bit cart before horse. I think the processes are more intertwined than that. The economy wants is growing in a certian area, that leads to a clear and pressing case for new infrastructure, which means there's less fractious debate, and the cost is justified almost immediately. You can't necessarily enhance the economy with new infrastructure, as the Humber Bridge shows.
Sunak should stick to his course of getting borrowing down. The next general election still doesn't have to be called for nearly 2 years and he shouldn't take much notice of polls midterm. As Thatcher said if you are the governing party and lead the polls midterm you aren't taking the tough decisions necessary. She of course regularly trailed Foot and Kinnock midterm before winning the actual general election.
Then once the deficit has been cut he can look towards tax cuts before the general election. Brexit has been done so is less of a distraction as it was in the last Parliament, even if a deal over NI would help
He should also look to regular debates with Starmer, I suspect he will do quite well with them with the public. He won most of the leadership debates with the public last summer after all
The thing you have to remember about Sunak is who appointed him in the first place. Sunak, Truss, Raab, Braverman, etc, etc, were picked by Boris because they lacked ability and talent and therefore could be no threat to his power.
And bigging Sunak up for debates is lunacy. Truss wiped the floor with him. Little Miss Vacant-head...
No she didn't, Sunak won the post debate polls in every debate with Truss the public watched
I see... he won so often he lost the leadership contest.
The public wanted Sunak not Truss, as did Tory MPs, only a narrow majority of Tory members backed Truss
The public do not want Sunak or Truss. Or have you failed to notice your Party's dive in the polls?
Sunak should stick to his course of getting borrowing down. The next general election still doesn't have to be called for nearly 2 years and he shouldn't take much notice of polls midterm. As Thatcher said if you are the governing party and lead the polls midterm you aren't taking the tough decisions necessary. She of course regularly trailed Foot and Kinnock midterm before winning the actual general election.
Then once the deficit has been cut he can look towards tax cuts before the general election. Brexit has been done so is less of a distraction as it was in the last Parliament, even if a deal over NI would help
He should also look to regular debates with Starmer, I suspect he will do quite well with them with the public. He won most of the leadership debates with the public last summer after all
The thing you have to remember about Sunak is who appointed him in the first place. Sunak, Truss, Raab, Braverman, etc, etc, were picked by Boris because they lacked ability and talent and therefore could be no threat to his power.
And bigging Sunak up for debates is lunacy. Truss wiped the floor with him. Little Miss Vacant-head...
No she didn't, Sunak won the post debate polls in every debate with Truss the public watched
I see... he won so often he lost the leadership contest.
The public wanted Sunak not Truss, as did Tory MPs, only a narrow majority of Tory members backed Truss
She won by 15% so "narrow" is a stretch. It's broadly the equivalent of an MP having a 10k majority at a General Election which is a pretty comfortable majority.
From a thread which details yesterday's anti corruption arrests in Ukraine. https://twitter.com/mattia_n/status/1620870322881986563 PS: I nearly missed to mention that today a large-scale prostitution ring was busted by the SBU and National Police. Guess who was heading this large “criminal organization”. Yes, the suspect is the deputy head of the Migration Police Department of the National Police of Ukraine
"Astounding’: Elizabeth line hits 100m passengers eight months after opening ‘Busy Lizzie’ has raised £50m in additional fares for TfL and become busiest rail line in UK"
It really does make the politicians who rejected in the 90s, delaying its introduction by 10-15 years, look quite bad.
Lessons for HS2.
Yep. It proves that there is enormous demand for infrastructure, if it is done right. The Liz Line will pay for itself relatively quickly, at this rate
I would personally have gone for Northern Powerhouse Rail - Hull to Liverpool - over HS2, but what the fuck. Do both! And a new Heathrow runway. Get the fuck on with it. Hopefully Starmer - if he has a big majority - will understand this
I know we are out of money but we're not going to save our economy by just accepting decline and diminution
"Astounding’: Elizabeth line hits 100m passengers eight months after opening ‘Busy Lizzie’ has raised £50m in additional fares for TfL and become busiest rail line in UK"
However, Mr Lord said there was little evidence of the Elizabeth line having “cannibalised” Tube passengers – meaning it has encouraged new journeys or attracted customers from the mainline railways.
Now, actually, taking pressure off the Central Line was part of the idea, but it's good if the line is generating new traffic too.
"If you build it, they will come" isn't always true (see Spain 2000-2008ish) but I don't think anyone seriously thinks that Britain's problems are caused by too much spending on infrastructure.
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
He evidently believes that gay marriage is not something he will die in a ditch for/fracture the global anglican community. As it stands, statute law follows canon law on this hence it is illegal (in statute law) for same sex marriage to be carried out in a CoE church or by its ministers. That is because as the established church everyone has a legal right to be married in a CoE church as long as they abide by the CoE's rules.
If the CoE were to disestablish then there would no longer be the legal right to be married in a CoE church (or by a CoE minister, nota bene @HYUFD).
So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
Which unfortunately for Welby is an attitude likely to see his facing a swifter removal than he hoped for and replacement by a more liberal Archbishop of Canterbury, given most Anglicans in England now back homosexual marriage
It seems so but I suppose you don't want to be the Archbishop that oversees disestablishment and a fracture of the global anglican community.
FWIW I don't think disestablishment is on the horizon. As to gay marriage opt out, this just follows the long and statutory right of vicars not to conduct remarriages, which causes little controversy.
The structural breakup of the worldwide Anglican communion would hardly be noticed in England. Few think about it much, and most links have nothing to do with its formal 'communion' nature.
English disestablishment has four big obstacles:
It removes public rights to access their parish church
It is legislatively very complex and far reaching, with loads of implications for the constitution. It is fruitless bother.
It alters, desacralises and marginalises the nature of our monarchy as it has existed since the 1540s.
No politician or AoC wants to be the one to be accountable for the change.
The second of the "quadruple locks" addresses the opt out (by which do you mean what if Vicar X decides they want to conduct SSMs). It is illegal for them to do so against the doctrinal position of the church. If the CoE says we don't allow SSM but if you (the vicars) want to conduct them then that's fine, then that is the CoE saying we do allow SSM and presumably Canon Law would need to be amended to that effect.
As for opting out of SSM that is of course the first lock:
"No religious organisation, or individual minister, could be compelled to marry same-sex couples (or to permit this to happen on their premises);"
"Astounding’: Elizabeth line hits 100m passengers eight months after opening ‘Busy Lizzie’ has raised £50m in additional fares for TfL and become busiest rail line in UK"
However, Mr Lord said there was little evidence of the Elizabeth line having “cannibalised” Tube passengers – meaning it has encouraged new journeys or attracted customers from the mainline railways.
Now, actually, taking pressure off the Central Line was part of the idea, but it's good if the line is generating new traffic too.
Hmm. 100m journeys, £50m extra revenue, so 50p extra per journey. Doesn't seem to imply a lot of new passengers, it feels like mostly people who had Travelcards anyway switching modes.
The Archbishop of Canterbury told a group of MPs that he would rather see the Church of England lose its status as an established church than risk a global organisation fracturing over clashes on gay marriage, The Times understands.
The Most Rev Justin Welby is said to have made the comment at a private meeting with MPs in Westminster this week.
How does that work? I don't see the causal link - but then I don't know much about the relationship between the the CofE and the wider worldwide Anglican community. How does disestablishment (which would be a good thing in its own right) stop a fracture over gay marriage? And as I understood it the wider Anglican community is now quite anti-gay marriage because of the domination of African churches. So does unity mean the CofE becomes anti gay marriage? How is that a good thing?
..So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
If doing so would split the Anglican Church.
I don't think he's personally so strongly opposed to the change.
Well yes I am not privy to his private thoughts about the matter but it didn't read like that but yes, it could be read as we are going to have same sex marriage to hell with the global anglican community...
Rather that he doesn't care much one way or the other about the policy, but cares a great deal about the maintenance of the global anglican communion.
Surely the global anglican community (GAC henceforth) is about ideological guidance or it is nothing.
He can't just not care about any particular issue.
Why not ? Not to prioritise the institution over particular principles would make him quite exceptional. Which isn't my impression of him, FWIW.
Sunak should stick to his course of getting borrowing down. The next general election still doesn't have to be called for nearly 2 years and he shouldn't take much notice of polls midterm. As Thatcher said if you are the governing party and lead the polls midterm you aren't taking the tough decisions necessary. She of course regularly trailed Foot and Kinnock midterm before winning the actual general election.
Then once the deficit has been cut he can look towards tax cuts before the general election. Brexit has been done so is less of a distraction as it was in the last Parliament, even if a deal over NI would help
He should also look to regular debates with Starmer, I suspect he will do quite well with them with the public. He won most of the leadership debates with the public last summer after all
The thing you have to remember about Sunak is who appointed him in the first place. Sunak, Truss, Raab, Braverman, etc, etc, were picked by Boris because they lacked ability and talent and therefore could be no threat to his power.
And bigging Sunak up for debates is lunacy. Truss wiped the floor with him. Little Miss Vacant-head...
No she didn't, Sunak won the post debate polls in every debate with Truss the public watched
I see... he won so often he lost the leadership contest.
The public wanted Sunak not Truss, as did Tory MPs, only a narrow majority of Tory members backed Truss
She won by 15% so "narrow" is a stretch. It's broadly the equivalent of an MP having a 10k majority at a General Election which is a pretty comfortable majority.
Also, I think Sunak 'won' the post debate poll by 38% to 37%? Not sure that exactly shows the public 'wanted' him. He was crap in the campaign; he is generally quite a crap communicator. Obviously it doesn't help that he has nothing good to communicate.
Rubbish. The British problem is a total lack of self-awareness. Not humble bragging.
Imagine if, for example, Fred Goodwin, Mark James, Simon Case, Amanda Spielman, Suella Braverman or Liz Truss could understand their own abilities and weaknesses properly, so they could get jobs on their intellectual and moral level. What a boon that would be to the nation.
Americans don't mind failure and over ambition, as long as you try again.
You are just reinforcing the article, accept your station in life and don't brag as the British stereotype.
To be fair to Goodwin he did turn RBS from a small Scottish Bank to the biggest in the world at one point before the Crash
He was the one who crashed it through over expansion.
Your second sentence is even more nonsensical than your usual standard, which is saying something. It's so stupid - and rude, contrary to your claims about yourself - it's not even worth the dignity of dismissing.
Like I say - self awareness is needed. Particularly among snobs who think they're brilliant because they went to the 'right' uni and got a degree despite being ignorant, and so rise effortlessly to the top where they sod everything up.
They need to learn they are rubbish, rather than say they are brilliant. Humble bragging isn't the problem in our society.
In your opinion virtually everybody is rubbish of course, apart from yourself!!
You say the same to me when you lose an argument and you always blame it on you being the only Tory here, even when the disagreement has nothing whatsoever to do with politics.
You are the classic of what @ydoethur describes. You have no self awareness whatsoever and can never accept you are ever wrong. You often for instance completely misunderstand posts and are unaware you have done so in particular when someone is being sarcastic or ironic.
I am certainly not going to concede to you and Ydoethur as you are amongst the rudest and most pompous posters on here, even Charles was never as self regarding as you 2 often are.
I did concede to Horse a point yesterday, as he is at least polite to me even if we differ politically
I would gently make the point that conceding to someone shouldn't depend on your opinion of them, but rather your opinion of their arguments.
Nice example of modern life and media today - the story about breaking in to homes to install prepayment meters.
British Gas are horrified that the outfits they outsource their dirty work to are doing exactly that.
The horrified media have no thoughts at all about how gas companies should be paid by people who do not intend to do so. And anyway profits are obscene.
Hard hit innocents from the deserving poor abound with their life histories.
The undeserving feckless get a free ride.
Good old modern Britain.
Given current energy prices, fitting a pre-payment meter is effectively disconnection for people on a low income.
Was a bit surprised to hear courts grant 99% of applications. Indicates the circs of the person being fitted with the meter don't have a particularly high priority in any decision.
I can't immediately find it, but there was a news story a couple of months ago that covered the process and it was no more than a rubber stamping of dozens of warrents as a batch. By phone.
R4 reported on it this morning. Magistrates courts apparently deal with the applications in batches. They estimated the numbers meant approximately 1 second of court time per application.
As defences go this is quite amusing but explains why Sunak is up shit creek without a canoe.
Dominic Raab has declared he has never sworn or shouted in a meeting after it was claimed he roared “bullshit” in response to a senior official’s briefing he disagreed with.
As officials made further claims of poor behaviour from the deputy prime minister, his allies launched a fightback, suggesting that civil servants were trying to force him out.
The investigation into Raab is now understood to be focusing on whether he knew the effect his behaviour was having on staff, a judgment that could be crucial to the justice secretary’s political future.
Adam Tolley KC, who is leading the investigation into bullying claims, is attempting to decide if Raab deliberately pilloried staff or was oblivious to how his officials were reacting.
Complainants believe that Raab knew what he was doing, saying he could “turn it off and on” at will and would behave better around people he wanted to impress. Raab denies bullying.
TBF to Raab (goes against the grain, but) in my experience of the DfE bullshit is what most civil servants seem to spout.
This would matter less if they weren’t utterly convinced of their own wisdom and knowledge.
Shouting “bullshit” is bullying? Either there is a lot being left out or what?
No, it's a piece of disputed evidence.
Is it therefore bullshit?
You can have swearing without bullying, and bullying without swearing, of course. In this particular case it appears to be a part of the complaint against him that Raab has specifically denied, and therefore a test of whether or not he's being truthful..
Sir Bernard Jenkins put it well yesterday on WatO: "Man up, Princess." (I paraphrase.)
Jenkin.
Also apparently missing the point. Deliberately or otherwise.
He's pretty dim, like his father, who once upon a time was my MP
"Astounding’: Elizabeth line hits 100m passengers eight months after opening ‘Busy Lizzie’ has raised £50m in additional fares for TfL and become busiest rail line in UK"
However, Mr Lord said there was little evidence of the Elizabeth line having “cannibalised” Tube passengers – meaning it has encouraged new journeys or attracted customers from the mainline railways.
Now, actually, taking pressure off the Central Line was part of the idea, but it's good if the line is generating new traffic too.
"If you build it, they will come" isn't always true (see Spain 2000-2008ish) but I don't think anyone seriously thinks that Britain's problems are caused by too much spending on infrastructure.
I think it's more "if you build it, and don't charge a fortune to use it, they will come."
And that's what I think the biggest issue with HS2 is. They are going to charge a fortune to use it and people will stick with the existing services.
Comments
Brexit would/will be much harder to unwind from a governance point of view. And whilst Brexit isn't working and is unpopular, there's still between a quarter and a third of voters keen on it, who are approximately the only people still voting blue.
You could also have mentioned council tax, of course, although as a student I was fortunately exempt from that.
He can't sweep away the crooks and the bullies.
He can't get past the stench of the sewer of open corruption.
He is sticking to the "nurses are communists" play even though the support for the strikers remains solid.
His ministers parrot the priorities that few agree with, and shows no sign of being able to deliver them.
We've just had @MoonRabbit say that not only will inflation collapse but people will thank the Tories for it. Real world inflation is well north of the official figure - so many key areas like food staples are a long way beyond. So there is a huuuuuge amount of contraction needed to hit a realised 4% as predicted.
Thing is, John Major's government actually did manage to turn around the economic shitshow caused by John Major's government. Things really did look rosy in the middle of the decade. Yet they didn't get the plaudits for this - because everyone was still stinging from the scars incurred during said shitshow.
We are deep in the latest shitshow. Even if over time things do improve, I expect the thanks the government gets to be more like John Major received than any Mills and Boon-style hazy love reimagining of "Lady" Thatcher.
You are just reinforcing the article, accept your station in life and don't brag as the British stereotype.
To be fair to Goodwin he did turn RBS from a small Scottish Bank to the biggest in the world at one point before the Crash
But, equally, it *may* have been an accurate remark. Indeed, recent experience suggests it probably was.
Perhaps the civil servant just wasn't used to (a) not being the one doing the shouting (b) being told he was talking rubbish. Many of them in my experience have the same snobbish attitudes to their intellect and experience we see from certain posters on this board - and with just as little justification.
Your second sentence is even more nonsensical than your usual standard, which is saying something. It's so stupid - and rude, contrary to your claims about yourself - it's not even worth the dignity of dismissing.
Like I say - self awareness is needed. Particularly among snobs who think they're brilliant because they went to the 'right' uni and got a degree despite being ignorant, and so rise effortlessly to the top where they sod everything up.
They need to learn they are rubbish, rather than say they are brilliant. Humble bragging isn't the problem in our society.
This in particular:
…The assumption was that Hong Kong would soon become like the rest of China. This was entirely wrong. The political and legal structure of Hong Kong remains as different now from the rest of China as in 1997…
The "irreversible decline" of the US is, ironically in view of the thrust of the article, prejudice speaking.
Recent genetic studies of archaeological remains have shown this bit to be surprisingly true in terms of population genetic stability, over several millennia.
...Or consider a quite different example. Over 90 per cent of Chinese think of themselves as of one race, the Han..
Of course, they might backtrack on the whole referendum thing if it starts to look like they'll fall back. In which case, I think it means that Sturgeon will try to keep going.
"Sorting out the mess our predecessors left" gets the benefit of the doubt.
"Sorting out the mess that happened earlier in our term" doesn't.
Sunak is in a bit of a pickle. The easiest way to demonstrate that he was a change with the recent Tory past, would be to pick a few fights with his backbenches in an attempt to convince the public that he was different and he would remake the Tory party in his image, one more to the public's liking. But Sunak's position within the party is far too weak to be able to attempt anything like that.
They certainly hired quite a few civil servants. Who ranged from excellent to piss poor. “Legend in their own minds” seemed to be a theme among the most useless.
I think in the U.K. too, like the US we can overlook our strengths while overestimating our weaknesses.
Not the fatuous boosterism of Johnson, but in COVID we produced a vaccine that probably saved more lives than any other and identified the WHO adopted dexamethsone protocol - expanded globally which saved further lives. Meanwhile others were bickering about “quasi ineffective vaccines” or pushing ivermectin.
There’s life in the old girl yet.
British Gas are horrified that the outfits they outsource their dirty work to are doing exactly that.
The horrified media have no thoughts at all about how gas companies should be paid by people who do not intend to do so. And anyway profits are obscene.
Hard hit innocents from the deserving poor abound with their life histories.
The undeserving feckless get a free ride.
Good old modern Britain.
Which is why people with memories, in the Labour Party, reacted to Corbyn as they did.
Most of us in the Church of England have no problem with homosexual Christians getting married in the established church. It is only a minority of evangelicals who do and if they walk and leave the Church of England rather than accept even a compromise opt out as Anglo Catholics have over women priests and Bishops so be it.
Some parts of the Anglican Communion likes the US, Scotland and Wales already allow homosexual marriages anyway, it is not just the anti homosexual marriage African churches
My hunch is she will win in 2024 - ie take a modest hit but still come out well on top. And then she will resign and move to a kushti gig in the UN or UNESCO whatever. She must be annoyed she can’t be kicked upstairs to a nice overpaid job in the EU
I'm interested to see what she ends her political career with. The GE next year? The next Scottish elections (2026)?. Without an Indyref, she needs to find something big and positive to end with.
I'd suggest a new, highly protected Hebridean National Park. Or a radical land reform bill that grabs more of the big estates. A massive cycling revolution in our cities (we are actually quite densely populated up here, so would work)?
And bigging Sunak up for debates is lunacy. Truss wiped the floor with him. Little Miss Vacant-head...
In this particular case it appears to be a part of the complaint against him that Raab has specifically denied, and therefore a test of whether or not he's being truthful..
IS! IT! THEREFORE! BULLSHIT?!?!??!
Of course, in 1997, Major did not get the credit for escaping the ERM he'd taken us into. Nor did Brown get much from not starting yet another war.
We're... back to 1991.
October 2007 was the peak, I've assumed 4% interest rates today.
How can he shift the polls? Use the low expectations he's successfully set and begin exceeding them radically and noticeably. But I just don't think this lot are about good Government. Even little things like dropping Liz's childcare reforms to make childcare cheaper. They're not interested. You have a Chancellor who thinks 15% is the right level for Corporation tax, imposing a huge rise instead.
I would give no currency at all to the defacto referendum idea. No one except National readers take it seriously.
Then she could demand, say, Single Market status as the price of Coalition. Because Starmer won’t grant a referendum but he would be quite keen to have an “excuse” to get the UK back in the SM
That would be a fine end-of-career positive result for Sturgeon. Majorly popular in Scotland. Leaves her with a massive achievement. The woman who half reversed Brexit! Exit to a lovely new job, perhaps in EFTA or whatever
Trouble is Starmer - I reckon - is going to get an absolute majority, and won’t need her
Even if inflation is down I suspect it will be “Thank you for your service. NEXT!
As the former head of the Civil Service said in an interview last night, civil servants aren't bothered by robust language from ministers; indeed they expect it.
(Edit) The alleged bullying in this case is about the systematic, targeted professional undermining of particular individual subordinates.
However the argument is disestablishment of the Church of England from some liberals like TSE if it puts preserving the Anglican Communion ahead of aligning the established church with English law which allows homosexual marriage.
In reality however if Labour got in changing the homosexual marriage Act to force the established Church of England to conduct homosexual marriages with no opt out (even for evangelicals) would be more effective in getting what they want than disestablishment (which would still see zero homosexual marriages in Church of England churches if Synod had not approved them and Welby was still Archbishop and put preservation of the Anglican Communion first).
The Anglican Communion is only a recent invention anyway, 1867 when most African nations had Queen Victoria as their head of state and effectively head of their emerging Anglican churches too. Charles is now not King or head of the Church of a single African nation. The Church of England however has been the established Church since Henry VIII broke with Rome in 1534
The Fed Raises Rates a Quarter Point and Signals More Ahead
America’s central bank has shifted into a new phase, raising rates more slowly as inflation shows signs of moderating.
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/01/business/federal-reserve-interest-rates.html
What could possibly go wrong? (lower pound, increasing inflation? - ed.)
If the CoE were to disestablish then there would no longer be the legal right to be married in a CoE church (or by a CoE minister, nota bene @HYUFD).
So Welby appears to be saying that he would rather the CoE disestablishes and takes its place with all the other religions in the UK than agree to same sex marriage.
It is fascinating how the Jobsworths take an idea and turn it into a sacred law.
https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2022/4-march/news/uk/yougov-poll-more-than-half-of-anglicans-believe-same-sex-marriage-to-be-right
I don't think he's personally so strongly opposed to the change.
I am not sure Labour have made enough effort yet to put that idea in voter consciousness. Starmer should be meeting with Blair, Campbell and Mandelson on a daily basis. Although to be fair the current Government are making their own case for defeat. What utter Victorian nonsense.
I think our government and politicians are rubbish because, objectively, they are. Again, that's probably what comes across most strongly on here because that's what we discuss. I don't think that of everyone. Quite the contrary, as a teacher I'm trained to see the best in people, and my ability to do so is why I was and am good at it. I just tend to assess people on their abilities and see no reason for pious platitudes where I see idiocy marred by arrogance.
Yes, of course the likes of Spielman and Gibb are stupider and more ignorant than me in educational matters as well, simply due to force of genetics and background, but in a sense that's beside the point. It doesn't matter if they're not as intellectually forceful or knowledgeable as me, because the question is whether despite that they're competent to do their jobs. Which many people would be, but they are not.
However, you think such people must be wonderful because they got good grades and went to the Russell Group. It's called 'snobbery.'
Also apparently missing the point.
Deliberately or otherwise.
‘Busy Lizzie’ has raised £50m in additional fares for TfL and become busiest rail line in UK"
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/elizabeth-line-100m-passengers-opening-tfl-trains-b1057106.html
Whether he is right or wrong or missing the point I can't say.
Was SAF a bully at Man U?
It's very far from a joke, and those in the organisation not subject to it are often completely oblivious to its going on (and others turn a blind eye).
Either one or the other. If the Church of England doesn't allow homosexual marriage still the African churches would stay but at the risk of disestablishment (or a Labour government forcing the established church to conducting homosexual marriages anyway with no opt out for evangelicals).
In any case the Anglican Communion is already split as the US, Welsh and Scottish provinces allow homosexual marriages and ignore what the African churches say. With a few Conservative Anglicans having left the Episcopalian Church to form The Anglican Church of North America which joined the anti gay marriage GAFCON with some African and Asian Anglican churches
Lessons for HS2.
You are the classic of what @ydoethur describes. You have no self awareness whatsoever and can never accept you are ever wrong. You often for instance completely misunderstand posts and are unaware you have done so in particular when someone is being sarcastic or ironic.
But yes, breaking up the Anglican communion would be a fateful step and that does give those who believe in the status quo something approaching a veto right now. (What's interesting to me is that some conservative evangelicals clearly want a separate church within the church and ate a bit frustrated that the current plans don't really justify that.)
But while Steveybabes (as he is still known in the vestries of Essex and East London) is definitely more pro change, that doesn't by itself change much. The AbofC isn't the Pope.
The civil servants who have complained about Raab will have worked with probably hundreds of Ministers - but Raab is the one facing widespread complaints.
I did concede to Horse a point yesterday, as he is at least polite to me even if we differ politically
He can't just not care about any particular issue.
The structural breakup of the worldwide Anglican communion would hardly be noticed in England. Few think about it much, and most links have nothing to do with its formal 'communion' nature.
English disestablishment has four big obstacles:
It removes public rights to access their parish church
It is legislatively very complex and far reaching, with loads of implications for the constitution. It is fruitless bother.
It alters, desacralises and marginalises the nature of our monarchy as it has existed since the 1540s.
No politician or AoC wants to be the one to be accountable for the change.
If you feel I am rude and pompous, maybe consider how you are coming across.
Anyway, life is too short. See you later.
However, Mr Lord said there was little evidence of the Elizabeth line having “cannibalised” Tube passengers – meaning it has encouraged new journeys or attracted customers from the mainline railways.
Now, actually, taking pressure off the Central Line was part of the idea, but it's good if the line is generating new traffic too.
Sunak is a dud. They all are.
https://twitter.com/mattia_n/status/1620870322881986563
PS: I nearly missed to mention that today a large-scale prostitution ring was busted by the SBU and National Police. Guess who was heading this large “criminal organization”. Yes, the suspect is the deputy head of the Migration Police Department of the National Police of Ukraine
I would personally have gone for Northern Powerhouse Rail - Hull to Liverpool - over HS2, but what the fuck. Do both! And a new Heathrow runway. Get the fuck on with it. Hopefully Starmer - if he has a big majority - will understand this
I know we are out of money but we're not going to save our economy by just accepting decline and diminution
As for opting out of SSM that is of course the first lock:
"No religious organisation, or individual minister, could be compelled to marry same-sex couples (or to permit this to happen on their premises);"
Not to prioritise the institution over particular principles would make him quite exceptional. Which isn't my impression of him, FWIW.
Magistrates courts apparently deal with the applications in batches. They estimated the numbers meant approximately 1 second of court time per application.
And that's what I think the biggest issue with HS2 is. They are going to charge a fortune to use it and people will stick with the existing services.