"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.
A lot of people I know have switched. It is faster and simpler for a number of journeys.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
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.
Yes! If you take forever over endless planning consultations and rethinks and changes-of-heart then it eats money and all the people who'd prefer a different route/something else/no spending will be annoyed about it for the whole duration of the dragged-out process, and nobody's happy because you haven't actually done anything yet. At least if you go ahead and get stuff built people will move on one way or another.
"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.
But there'll be more services on the existing lines, which is the real payoff.
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
"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.
HS1 costs more than the old line from Kent to London, but not massively more. And it's absolutely worth it.
Parliament. The Met. Other police forces. The NHS. The Army. The London Fire Brigade.
Now another fire service.
Could these men just learn to behave, for crying out loud. It's not that hard.
And if they can't could they just piss off to some remote part of the world and behave like priapic baboons with each other and leave civilised people in peace. Thanks.
Other parts of the world have their own problems. This is not a headline I think acceptable, but it reflects the social reality there.
Is non-consensual sex not rape?
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2023/02/113_344628.html … In recent years, women's rights groups and civic activists, who claim that the existing rape law is outdated and insufficient to protect the victims, have been strongly demanding the legal definition of rape to be expanded to include non-consensual sex.
But the idea has drawn fierce backlash from some men who believe that a consent-based definition of rape may result in an increase of false rape accusations. They view that whether the sexual activity was consensual or non-consensual will be difficult to confirm in court proceedings.
The thorny issue was spotlighted again recently after the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family retracted a plan to review revisions to the rape law to include non-consensual sex, a few hours after it was announced…
… Rep. Kweon Seong-dong of the ruling People Power Party (PPP) claimed that the proposed revision will only worsen gender conflicts.
"Such a law may result in possible false rape allegations. It will be highly difficult to determine a criminal offense based only on a victim's claim," he wrote on Facebook. The lawmaker also said that state intervention over individuals' sexual activities, which are considered a private matter, should be limited to a minimum level. ..
What the hell is non-consensual sex if it isn't rape?
Honestly a lot of men - whether here or abroad - seem to think that women just exist to serve men, as a sort of wallpaper to men's lives and needs. As if we don't exist for real, for ourselves.
It is very very tiresome. A lot of men really need to grow up.
Apologies - I omitted this paragraph: Korea's Criminal Law defines the crime of rape as sexual activity against one's will involving "violence or intimidation." As such, in order to secure a rape conviction, prosecutors must prove that the perpetrator had used or threatened violence against the victim. Sexual assault against a victim in a vulnerable state, such as under the influence of alcohol or drugs, is seen as "quasi-rape."…
Social attitudes have changed massively in South Korea in recent decades, but remain quite regressive in terms of women’s rights - something which is also a strong dividing line between liberal and conservative politics. Note that the change in the law was proposed, and rejected, by the current conservative administration. Korean liberal politicians would have enacted it.
It’s not all that long ago that the UK was every bit as bad, as you will recall.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law#History … In January 1982, the Government accepted an amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill the effect of which, if enacted, would be to compel judges to sentence men convicted of rape to imprisonment. This followed a case earlier that month in which John Allen, 33, businessman and convicted of raping a 17-year-old hitchhiker, had been fined £2,000 by Judge Bernard Richard, who alleged the victim's "contributory negligence".
There is currently a consultation by the CPS on the offence of rape by deception and some of what it says is a bit worrying. It is showing a tendency to retreat to attitudes somewhat similar to those expressed by those Korean men.
"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.
A lot of people I know have switched. It is faster and simpler for a number of journeys.
The attitude is “can you use it?”
Yeah, I'm one of them. I may have mentioned this before - I have to be in London occasionally for work and previously I'd stay wherever I could get a cheapish decentish hotel without too long of a journey to the centre. And now I always stay at Heathrow and get the Liz Line.
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
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
So you are not going to concede because we are rude and pompous even if we are right? OK that is logical.
Regarding being rude and pompous you might like to see how I and @ydoethur communicate and argue with others and see whether it is us or you who has a problem. I refer you to a joke post by Robert a few months ago who jokingly said he was going to ban 3 individuals for being too reasonable. I was one of those 3. As usual you don't have any self awareness. It is always others, never yourself.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
My forecast is LAB get between 310 and 340. So LAB short by 15 to LAB maj 30. Any outcome in that range will see Keir as PM.
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
So you are not going to concede because we are rude and pompous even if we are right? OK that is logical
I can see this featuring, in a related format, in the defence of one D Raab.
Thameslink is a bit shoddy, tho, and doesn't stop in enough central London stations, also it needs to swerve further west through London, maybe through Padders
They need to start building a north-sound version of the Elizabeth Line as soon as possible. St Albans to Croydon sort of route.
Yes, Crossrail 2. I'd extend it further than that. Gatwick to Luton. Airport to Airport. Perfect
The current plan for Crossrail 2 is Wimbledon to Tottenham Hale. The latter could extend to Stansted easily enough although that doesn't appear to be in the current plans - also I'm not sure if a spur to Heathrow from Feltham would be feasible (and in any case, again the Feltham line isn't in the current plans).
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..
I am curious about the reference to "abusive husband" in the Mirror's headline about Raab yesterday. It is quite the innuendo. Was it just the work of an overenthusiastic headline writer? Or is there more to this story?
On topic, the Tories are done. They have no idea what they are for any more. If they were to try and behave competently and honourably in the time left they could go down to an honourable defeat. But they seem determined to do the opposite so a total - or near total - wipe out cannot be ruled out.
Labour having a large majority will be a very bad thing because such governments quickly become arrogant and hubristic and because our system requires an effective opposition. So I expect the incompetence, poor governance, conflicts of interest and corruption to continue. It'll just have a different flavour.
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
You conceded a point yesterday? I've looked for this rarity and cannot find it - do please share.
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
So you are not going to concede because we are rude and pompous even if we are right? OK that is logical.
Regarding being rude and pompous you might like to see how I and @ydoethur communicate and argue with others and see whether it is us or you who has a problem. I refer you to a joke post by Robert a few months ago who jokingly said he was going to ban 3 individuals for being too reasonable. I was one of those 3. As usual you don't have any self awareness. It is always others, never yourself.
I come here to discuss issues and politics. All too frequently it becomes personal with you and increasingly Ydoethur and that has been commented on by others.
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
A sort of "Church Brexit"?
Chexit?
No, that was the Reformation.
Even now most Eurozone nations are Roman Catholic heritage, most non Eurozone or non EU western European nations are Protestant heritage
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
I don't really see how. Even if tomorrow the Russians say 'right lads, pack your bags, we're off' it won't normalise relations and they will still want to keep gas sanctions. And we'll then be on the hook for rebuilding the sodding place.
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
So you are not going to concede because we are rude and pompous even if we are right? OK that is logical
I can see this featuring, in a related format, in the defence of one D Raab.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
Or an avian flu turning into a human flu pandemic.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
I don't really see how. Even if tomorrow the Russians say 'right lads, pack your bags, we're off' it won't normalise relations and they will still want to keep gas sanctions. And we'll then be on the hook for rebuilding the sodding place.
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
A sort of "Church Brexit"?
Chexit?
No, that was the Reformation.
Even now most Eurozone nations are Roman Catholic heritage, most non Eurozone or non EU western European nations are Protestant heritage
Germany being the rather notable exception and representing ~30% of the Eurozone economy, and 20% of the entire EU population.
ETA: (For clarity, I am not contradicting you; there are a plurality of continuing-Catholic-heritage states in the EU; just that it is actually a more even split than people might read into your statement)
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
A Ukrainian win of any sorts could be channeled by Johnson as a personal Churchillian victory. It could well be a Falklands Factor.
I noted from Nick Ferrari this morning that Johnson is on manouvres. They were interviewing Eddie Lister who was anticipating a good chance of a Johnson return. Johnson, he claims is the greatest orator in the HoC (which I would refute) and his Prime Ministerial campaigning brilliance (I can't discount that) could ensure the Tories are rewarded.
Thameslink clearly need to raise their PR game, given how many people don't seem to know of its existence! Our local station is on one of Thameslink's southern spurs. It is a great service, offering regular trains to Blackfriars, the city, Farringdon (connection to Elizabeth Line and Heathrow) and King's Cross/St Pancras (trains to France and Scotland).
"More than 2,800 people may be working as nurses under false pretenses after allegedly buying a fake diploma for between $10,000 and $15,000 from a massive Florida-based scheme recently busted by federal investigators"
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
A Ukrainian win of any sorts could be channeled by Johnson as a personal Churchillian victory. It could well be a Falklands Factor.
I noted from Nick Ferrari this morning that Johnson is on manouvres. They were interviewing Eddie Lister who was anticipating a good chance of a Johnson return. Johnson, he claims is the greatest orator in the HoC (which I would refute) and his Prime Ministerial campaigning brilliance (I can't discount that) could ensure the Tories are rewarded.
If Johnson really is "the greatest orator in the House of Commons", it is a sad lookout for the current state of the HoC. He demonstrated himself to be really quite feeble in that regard.
But I appreciate that the narrative and the reality don't have to match if you just repeat the lie often enough.
Why? Because avian flu, in humans, has a mortality rate of about 60%. It is the Black Death, 2.0
Interestingly (to me...) although Crossrail 2 hasn't even been finalised yet, there has been some work on it. ISTR that when Tottenham Court Road station was rebuilt for Crossrail, they designed it so that Crossrail 2 would fit in. And the new British Library extension will have room for Crossrail 2's tunnels to pass under it.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
I don't really see how. Even if tomorrow the Russians say 'right lads, pack your bags, we're off' it won't normalise relations and they will still want to keep gas sanctions. And we'll then be on the hook for rebuilding the sodding place.
I don’t want to be a dismal Jimmy over this, but assuming a massive rebuilding program in Ukraine and consequently investment from outside, what would be the chances of Putin’s successor having another go in 20 years time? It’s not as if there were not historic ties between Russia and Ukraine!
"More than 2,800 people may be working as nurses under false pretenses after allegedly buying a fake diploma for between $10,000 and $15,000 from a massive Florida-based scheme recently busted by federal investigators"
Unsurprising given the exorbitant costs of tuition nowadays and the fact that degrees are "needed" for any good jobs, but aren't actually used by a great many of those jobs except for gatekeeping.
If you can pay a fraction of the cost, get the paper to claim you have a degree, and get your foot in the door - it may be criminal but its almost worthy of respect. Almost.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
A Ukrainian win of any sorts could be channeled by Johnson as a personal Churchillian victory. It could well be a Falklands Factor.
I noted from Nick Ferrari this morning that Johnson is on manouvres. They were interviewing Eddie Lister who was anticipating a good chance of a Johnson return. Johnson, he claims is the greatest orator in the HoC (which I would refute) and his Prime Ministerial campaigning brilliance (I can't discount that) could ensure the Tories are rewarded.
If Johnson really is "the greatest orator in the House of Commons", it is a sad lookout for the current state of the HoC. He demonstrated himself to be really quite feeble in that regard.
But I appreciate that the narrative and the reality don't have to match if you just repeat the lie often enough.
I think Boris could give quite good pre-prepared speeches. When it came to thinking on his feet and responding to questions, however, he could be fairly poor.
Are there any tub-thumping orators left in the Commons?
"More than 2,800 people may be working as nurses under false pretenses after allegedly buying a fake diploma for between $10,000 and $15,000 from a massive Florida-based scheme recently busted by federal investigators"
I would imagine the people doing those kind of checks on prospective employees would be amongst the first to be cut when we go for our culls of pen pushers, administrators and red tape.
I don't really know if we have too many or too few of such people in our NHS, but would be fairly confident that the politicians in charge don't know either and simply regurgitate these calls out of ideoligical stubborness.
"More than 2,800 people may be working as nurses under false pretenses after allegedly buying a fake diploma for between $10,000 and $15,000 from a massive Florida-based scheme recently busted by federal investigators"
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
I don't really see how. Even if tomorrow the Russians say 'right lads, pack your bags, we're off' it won't normalise relations and they will still want to keep gas sanctions. And we'll then be on the hook for rebuilding the sodding place.
I don’t want to be a dismal Jimmy over this, but assuming a massive rebuilding program in Ukraine and consequently investment from outside, what would be the chances of Putin’s successor having another go in 20 years time? It’s not as if there were not historic ties between Russia and Ukraine!
Slim to zero surely. Russia will have been utterly humiliated and Ukraine will have been majorly developed to the point of being in NATO by then either officially or unofficially.
Russia thought they were 'the big I am' in their 'sphere of influence' which ought to include Ukraine. Now they rudely know better, as do their neighbours who won't let themselves be in a position to be exposed to an invasion quite frankly.
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
A sort of "Church Brexit"?
Chexit?
No, that was the Reformation.
Even now most Eurozone nations are Roman Catholic heritage, most non Eurozone or non EU western European nations are Protestant heritage
Are you suggesting that we need an Anglican Settlement Brexit?
Wouldn't that be one where one where we don't seek windows into souls and allow people to be in the EU in practice just not in theory?
(Shades of the old Hard ECU / Parallel currencies idea, I suppose...)
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
I don't really see how. Even if tomorrow the Russians say 'right lads, pack your bags, we're off' it won't normalise relations and they will still want to keep gas sanctions. And we'll then be on the hook for rebuilding the sodding place.
I don’t want to be a dismal Jimmy over this, but assuming a massive rebuilding program in Ukraine and consequently investment from outside, what would be the chances of Putin’s successor having another go in 20 years time? It’s not as if there were not historic ties between Russia and Ukraine!
I think the chances are "very high" but...
In that time frame, I think Ukrainian military preparedness and experience would also remain "very high", and any kind of significant operation would be challenging for a Russia still suffering from a wide range of legacy sanctions and a decreasing demand for their hydrocarbons.
We'd be much more likely to see assorted dirty tricks of the old-fashioned insurgency kind.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
I don't really see how. Even if tomorrow the Russians say 'right lads, pack your bags, we're off' it won't normalise relations and they will still want to keep gas sanctions. And we'll then be on the hook for rebuilding the sodding place.
I don’t want to be a dismal Jimmy over this, but assuming a massive rebuilding program in Ukraine and consequently investment from outside, what would be the chances of Putin’s successor having another go in 20 years time? It’s not as if there were not historic ties between Russia and Ukraine!
Impossible to say. As long as the Russian people think that the entirety of eastern Europe is their domain, it remains a risk.
But the question is what will Russia be like in twenty years? Even if it remains intact as a country (not a given), it has relied on hydrocarbon money for a few decades, and has not invested that money wisely. As the world economy decarbonises, Russia's income will reduce.
This war is killing thousands of Ukrainians, but it is destroying Russia's reputation and future.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
Biden will want the conflict, at the very least, quiesced before the start of the 2024 Presidential campaign so he'll probably tell what's left of Ukraine to chill out before the end of this year.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
Biden will want the conflict, at the very least, quiesced before the start of the 2024 Presidential campaign so he'll probably tell what's left of Ukraine to chill out before the end of this year.
"chill out" - says the man who keeps calling Russia's invasion the SMO.
If you want "chill" then there's a simple way to get that, Russia withdraws back to its recognised 1991 borders. The end.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
A Ukrainian win of any sorts could be channeled by Johnson as a personal Churchillian victory. It could well be a Falklands Factor.
I noted from Nick Ferrari this morning that Johnson is on manouvres. They were interviewing Eddie Lister who was anticipating a good chance of a Johnson return. Johnson, he claims is the greatest orator in the HoC (which I would refute) and his Prime Ministerial campaigning brilliance (I can't discount that) could ensure the Tories are rewarded.
If Johnson really is "the greatest orator in the House of Commons", it is a sad lookout for the current state of the HoC. He demonstrated himself to be really quite feeble in that regard.
But I appreciate that the narrative and the reality don't have to match if you just repeat the lie often enough.
Indeed. Peppa Pig waves his curly tail in agreement.
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
So you are not going to concede because we are rude and pompous even if we are right? OK that is logical.
Regarding being rude and pompous you might like to see how I and @ydoethur communicate and argue with others and see whether it is us or you who has a problem. I refer you to a joke post by Robert a few months ago who jokingly said he was going to ban 3 individuals for being too reasonable. I was one of those 3. As usual you don't have any self awareness. It is always others, never yourself.
I come here to discuss issues and politics. All too frequently it becomes personal with you and increasingly Ydoethur and that has been commented on by others.
There you again with your lack of self awareness.
a) You are often very rude to us, but you are unaware of it. It can cause a reaction back.
b) Our reaction to you is usually because of your complete lack of self awareness and your irrationality so we get utterly frustrated. Look at the discussions we have with others. None are the same. Why do you think that is? I know you think it is because you are the only Tory on the site but that is not true and often it is not about politics at all anyway - it is your go to defence and is wrong.
c) Commented on by others? Again an example of your lack of awareness. Have a look at any of these discussions and see. Look at the likes, look at the numbers agreeing with you or us. The only negatives we tend to get is with people suggesting we just give up as it is pointless and boring to them, with which I agree, so I am conflicted there. One of the problems in this area is you don't seem to get irony or sarcasm. Numerous times I have seen you like something which was actually not supporting your view but being ironic or sarcastic and you just don't get it.
Anyway lets stop as this is not a discussion on politics or an issue as you rightly say, but each of us analysing each other and neither of us are qualified to do that.
One point I would like to make though is I have gone out of my way over the last few weeks to 'like' or compliment you on a number of your posts with which I agree to build bridges.
I'm guessing this post will be a waste of time, but it was worth a shot. I'm guessing you are just going to respond with I'm being pompous again or it is because I am a liberal and you are a Tory. Neither are relevant.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
I don't really see how. Even if tomorrow the Russians say 'right lads, pack your bags, we're off' it won't normalise relations and they will still want to keep gas sanctions. And we'll then be on the hook for rebuilding the sodding place.
I don’t want to be a dismal Jimmy over this, but assuming a massive rebuilding program in Ukraine and consequently investment from outside, what would be the chances of Putin’s successor having another go in 20 years time? It’s not as if there were not historic ties between Russia and Ukraine!
Slim to zero surely. Russia will have been utterly humiliated and Ukraine will have been majorly developed to the point of being in NATO by then either officially or unofficially.
Russia thought they were 'the big I am' in their 'sphere of influence' which ought to include Ukraine. Now they rudely know better, as do their neighbours who won't let themselves be in a position to be exposed to an invasion quite frankly.
I think you also have to factor in the increasing strength of Poland as a regional power, as touched on in this place a few days ago. That has to be a further deterrent.
All you free marketeers on here...do you think there is any level of profit-taking from the economy that is 'too much'? If so, is £32.2bn too much? If so, what should be done about it?
FWIW, I recognise the risks of stepping in to regulate this further. But I also see the risks and distortion effects of profits this size, particularly in the way it funnels money from the economy as a whole into the pockets of a smaller group of richer individuals, who are then able to distort markets such as the housing market in London, because of their excess wealth.
Yes, I know institutional investors, pension funds etc are a thing and profits like this can be good for them, and I'm not dismissing that angle, I just don't think it's the whole story.
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
A sort of "Church Brexit"?
Chexit?
No, that was the Reformation.
Even now most Eurozone nations are Roman Catholic heritage, most non Eurozone or non EU western European nations are Protestant heritage
Germany being the rather notable exception and representing ~30% of the Eurozone economy, and 20% of the entire EU population.
ETA: (For clarity, I am not contradicting you; there are a plurality of continuing-Catholic-heritage states in the EU; just that it is actually a more even split than people might read into your statement)
True, though Bavaria has always been Roman Catholic heritage of course.
"More than 2,800 people may be working as nurses under false pretenses after allegedly buying a fake diploma for between $10,000 and $15,000 from a massive Florida-based scheme recently busted by federal investigators"
Unsurprising given the exorbitant costs of tuition nowadays and the fact that degrees are "needed" for any good jobs, but aren't actually used by a great many of those jobs except for gatekeeping.
If you can pay a fraction of the cost, get the paper to claim you have a degree, and get your foot in the door - it may be criminal but its almost worthy of respect. Almost.
We should fix the problems at root cause.
Yes, from JJ's link, this part stands out:-
With a fake diploma and transcript, an unscrupulous aspiring nurse can qualify to take the national nursing board exam. And if they pass the exam, they can become licensed nurses and get a job in a health care setting. Federal authorities reported that of the 7,600 people with the alleged fake diplomas, around 37 percent—more than 2,800 people—passed the exam. Many went on to get jobs as licensed nurses.
So it does sound like a gatekeeping qualification needed in order to take the final exam. One wonders how many had qualified in Central or South American countries whose qualifications are not recognised by the United States, as opposed to just walking in off the streets.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
A Ukrainian win of any sorts could be channeled by Johnson as a personal Churchillian victory. It could well be a Falklands Factor.
I noted from Nick Ferrari this morning that Johnson is on manouvres. They were interviewing Eddie Lister who was anticipating a good chance of a Johnson return. Johnson, he claims is the greatest orator in the HoC (which I would refute) and his Prime Ministerial campaigning brilliance (I can't discount that) could ensure the Tories are rewarded.
If Johnson really is "the greatest orator in the House of Commons", it is a sad lookout for the current state of the HoC. He demonstrated himself to be really quite feeble in that regard.
But I appreciate that the narrative and the reality don't have to match if you just repeat the lie often enough.
I think Boris could give quite good pre-prepared speeches. When it came to thinking on his feet and responding to questions, however, he could be fairly poor.
Are there any tub-thumping orators left in the Commons?
The one that springs to mind is Michael Gove closing the no confidence debate a few years ago.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
I don't really see how. Even if tomorrow the Russians say 'right lads, pack your bags, we're off' it won't normalise relations and they will still want to keep gas sanctions. And we'll then be on the hook for rebuilding the sodding place.
I don’t want to be a dismal Jimmy over this, but assuming a massive rebuilding program in Ukraine and consequently investment from outside, what would be the chances of Putin’s successor having another go in 20 years time? It’s not as if there were not historic ties between Russia and Ukraine!
Impossible to say. As long as the Russian people think that the entirety of eastern Europe is their domain, it remains a risk.
But the question is what will Russia be like in twenty years? Even if it remains intact as a country (not a given), it has relied on hydrocarbon money for a few decades, and has not invested that money wisely. As the world economy decarbonises, Russia's income will reduce.
This war is killing thousands of Ukrainians, but it is destroying Russia's reputation and future.
How does climate change impact Russia? Presumably, if it was a stable nation, global warming would make it (maybe along with Canada?) the best location to resettle those displaced in the rest of the world and it could grow very rapidly. Hydrocarbon money could be replaced by huge bits of sparsely populated frozen land becoming attractive for development and housing.
'Pre-prepared' remains one of the ugliest tautologies out there.
What other kind of preparation is there?!
Preparation without pre-preparation is different though.
I can cook dinner without having done any preparation, simply doing it all on the fly. Or I can prepare dinner on the day just before I am going to cook it, or I can pre-prepare it in advance the day before.
Pre-prepare means to prepare something in advance of when you'd need to prepare it. Hence its etymology, pre-prepare.
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...
I largely agree but Johnson's also had the problem of having to pick a Cabinet of Brexiteers and let's face it he was fishing in a very small pool in terms of competence and ability.
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
Jonathan Wilde would have approved
{the West Midlands Serious Crimes Squad has entered the chat, and stolen everything}
I can see no justification for taxpayers paying for Johnson's legal bills over this.
Boris will be Boris. He's special.
The irony of all this negativity swirling around Johnson is the loser seems to be Sunak, and Johnson's stock rises amongst those who will vote to replace Sunak with Johnson. Strange days indeed.
I can see no justification for taxpayers paying for Johnson's legal bills over this.
Boris will be Boris. He's special.
The irony of all this negativity swirling around Johnson is the loser seems to be Sunak, and Johnson's stock rises amongst those who will vote to replace Sunak with Johnson. Strange days indeed.
Life around Boris has never been fair for those in his orbit.
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
So you are not going to concede because we are rude and pompous even if we are right? OK that is logical.
Regarding being rude and pompous you might like to see how I and @ydoethur communicate and argue with others and see whether it is us or you who has a problem. I refer you to a joke post by Robert a few months ago who jokingly said he was going to ban 3 individuals for being too reasonable. I was one of those 3. As usual you don't have any self awareness. It is always others, never yourself.
I come here to discuss issues and politics. All too frequently it becomes personal with you and increasingly Ydoethur and that has been commented on by others.
There you again with your lack of self awareness.
a) You are often very rude to us, but you are unaware of it. It can cause a reaction back.
b) Our reaction to you is usually because of your complete lack of self awareness and your irrationality so we get utterly frustrated. Look at the discussions we have with others. None are the same. Why do you think that is? I know you think it is because you are the only Tory on the site but that is not true and often it is not about politics at all anyway - it is your go to defence and is wrong.
c) Commented on by others? Again an example of your lack of awareness. Have a look at any of these discussions and see. Look at the likes, look at the numbers agreeing with you or us. The only negatives we tend to get is with people suggesting we just give up as it is pointless and boring to them, with which I agree, so I am conflicted there. One of the problems in this area is you don't seem to get irony or sarcasm. Numerous times I have seen you like something which was actually not supporting your view but being ironic or sarcastic and you just don't get it.
Anyway lets stop as this is not a discussion on politics or an issue as you rightly say, but each of us analysing each other and neither of us are qualified to do that.
One point I would like to make though is I have gone out of my way over the last few weeks to 'like' or compliment you on a number of your posts with which I agree to build bridges.
I'm guessing this post will be a waste of time, but it was worth a shot. I'm guessing you are just going to respond with I'm being pompous again or it is because I am a liberal and you are a Tory. Neither are relevant.
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
A sort of "Church Brexit"?
Chexit?
No, that was the Reformation.
Even now most Eurozone nations are Roman Catholic heritage, most non Eurozone or non EU western European nations are Protestant heritage
Germany being the rather notable exception and representing ~30% of the Eurozone economy, and 20% of the entire EU population.
ETA: (For clarity, I am not contradicting you; there are a plurality of continuing-Catholic-heritage states in the EU; just that it is actually a more even split than people might read into your statement)
True, though Bavaria has always been Roman Catholic heritage of course.
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
A sort of "Church Brexit"?
Chexit?
No, that was the Reformation.
Even now most Eurozone nations are Roman Catholic heritage, most non Eurozone or non EU western European nations are Protestant heritage
Germany being the rather notable exception and representing ~30% of the Eurozone economy, and 20% of the entire EU population.
ETA: (For clarity, I am not contradicting you; there are a plurality of continuing-Catholic-heritage states in the EU; just that it is actually a more even split than people might read into your statement)
True, though Bavaria has always been Roman Catholic heritage of course.
True - although actually "no religion" is the plurality (unlike the UK where Christianity is still hanging on in there!)
No Christianity overall is the majority, more Germans are Christian than in the UK, 52% to 46% but more Germans are non religious too, 42% to 37% in the UK.
Just Germany has fewer Muslims, Hindus and unsurprisingly Jews than the UK too
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
A Ukrainian win of any sorts could be channeled by Johnson as a personal Churchillian victory. It could well be a Falklands Factor.
I noted from Nick Ferrari this morning that Johnson is on manouvres. They were interviewing Eddie Lister who was anticipating a good chance of a Johnson return. Johnson, he claims is the greatest orator in the HoC (which I would refute) and his Prime Ministerial campaigning brilliance (I can't discount that) could ensure the Tories are rewarded.
If Johnson really is "the greatest orator in the House of Commons", it is a sad lookout for the current state of the HoC. He demonstrated himself to be really quite feeble in that regard.
But I appreciate that the narrative and the reality don't have to match if you just repeat the lie often enough.
I think Boris could give quite good pre-prepared speeches. When it came to thinking on his feet and responding to questions, however, he could be fairly poor.
Are there any tub-thumping orators left in the Commons?
The one that springs to mind is Michael Gove closing the no confidence debate a few years ago.
Interesting comment because although I haven't generally noticed this about Gove I was at one of the counts where he gave his acceptance speech and it was really excellent and appeared to be completely off the cuff so he is capable of it certainly.
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
A sort of "Church Brexit"?
Chexit?
No, that was the Reformation.
Even now most Eurozone nations are Roman Catholic heritage, most non Eurozone or non EU western European nations are Protestant heritage
Germany being the rather notable exception and representing ~30% of the Eurozone economy, and 20% of the entire EU population.
ETA: (For clarity, I am not contradicting you; there are a plurality of continuing-Catholic-heritage states in the EU; just that it is actually a more even split than people might read into your statement)
True, though Bavaria has always been Roman Catholic heritage of course.
True - although actually "no religion" is the plurality (unlike the UK where Christianity is still hanging on in there!)
Only because C of E has evolved as a form of Christianity with very minimal requirements by way of observance or behaviour! The 'only weddings, funerals and carols' brigade don't even need to believe in god to tick CofE in the census.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
A Ukrainian win of any sorts could be channeled by Johnson as a personal Churchillian victory. It could well be a Falklands Factor.
I noted from Nick Ferrari this morning that Johnson is on manouvres. They were interviewing Eddie Lister who was anticipating a good chance of a Johnson return. Johnson, he claims is the greatest orator in the HoC (which I would refute) and his Prime Ministerial campaigning brilliance (I can't discount that) could ensure the Tories are rewarded.
If Johnson really is "the greatest orator in the House of Commons", it is a sad lookout for the current state of the HoC. He demonstrated himself to be really quite feeble in that regard.
But I appreciate that the narrative and the reality don't have to match if you just repeat the lie often enough.
I think Boris could give quite good pre-prepared speeches. When it came to thinking on his feet and responding to questions, however, he could be fairly poor.
Are there any tub-thumping orators left in the Commons?
The one that springs to mind is Michael Gove closing the no confidence debate a few years ago.
Interesting comment because although I haven't generally noticed this about Gove I was at one of the counts where he gave his acceptance speech and it was really excellent and appeared to be completely off the cuff so he is capable of it certainly.
Given that one of the theories of our current political state is an overabundance of Oxford Union types, it's a bit surprising how poor the current standard of oratory is.
Bozza, for example, has always been saved by either a) good editors (Telegraph or television) or b) his audience being half-cut.
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
A sort of "Church Brexit"?
Chexit?
No, that was the Reformation.
Even now most Eurozone nations are Roman Catholic heritage, most non Eurozone or non EU western European nations are Protestant heritage
Germany being the rather notable exception and representing ~30% of the Eurozone economy, and 20% of the entire EU population.
ETA: (For clarity, I am not contradicting you; there are a plurality of continuing-Catholic-heritage states in the EU; just that it is actually a more even split than people might read into your statement)
True, though Bavaria has always been Roman Catholic heritage of course.
True - although actually "no religion" is the plurality (unlike the UK where Christianity is still hanging on in there!)
Though in the UK Christianity is treated as one religion for statistical purposes as far as I can tell. I'm pretty sure that is it was split down even into RC, Anglican and "other Christian", then "no religion" would be the plurality.
Parliament. The Met. Other police forces. The NHS. The Army. The London Fire Brigade.
Now another fire service.
Could these men just learn to behave, for crying out loud. It's not that hard.
And if they can't could they just piss off to some remote part of the world and behave like priapic baboons with each other and leave civilised people in peace. Thanks.
Other parts of the world have their own problems. This is not a headline I think acceptable, but it reflects the social reality there.
Is non-consensual sex not rape?
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2023/02/113_344628.html … In recent years, women's rights groups and civic activists, who claim that the existing rape law is outdated and insufficient to protect the victims, have been strongly demanding the legal definition of rape to be expanded to include non-consensual sex.
But the idea has drawn fierce backlash from some men who believe that a consent-based definition of rape may result in an increase of false rape accusations. They view that whether the sexual activity was consensual or non-consensual will be difficult to confirm in court proceedings.
The thorny issue was spotlighted again recently after the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family retracted a plan to review revisions to the rape law to include non-consensual sex, a few hours after it was announced…
… Rep. Kweon Seong-dong of the ruling People Power Party (PPP) claimed that the proposed revision will only worsen gender conflicts.
"Such a law may result in possible false rape allegations. It will be highly difficult to determine a criminal offense based only on a victim's claim," he wrote on Facebook. The lawmaker also said that state intervention over individuals' sexual activities, which are considered a private matter, should be limited to a minimum level. ..
What the hell is non-consensual sex if it isn't rape?
Honestly a lot of men - whether here or abroad - seem to think that women just exist to serve men, as a sort of wallpaper to men's lives and needs. As if we don't exist for real, for ourselves.
It is very very tiresome. A lot of men really need to grow up.
Apologies - I omitted this paragraph: Korea's Criminal Law defines the crime of rape as sexual activity against one's will involving "violence or intimidation." As such, in order to secure a rape conviction, prosecutors must prove that the perpetrator had used or threatened violence against the victim. Sexual assault against a victim in a vulnerable state, such as under the influence of alcohol or drugs, is seen as "quasi-rape."…
Social attitudes have changed massively in South Korea in recent decades, but remain quite regressive in terms of women’s rights - something which is also a strong dividing line between liberal and conservative politics. Note that the change in the law was proposed, and rejected, by the current conservative administration. Korean liberal politicians would have enacted it.
It’s not all that long ago that the UK was every bit as bad, as you will recall.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_English_law#History … In January 1982, the Government accepted an amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill the effect of which, if enacted, would be to compel judges to sentence men convicted of rape to imprisonment. This followed a case earlier that month in which John Allen, 33, businessman and convicted of raping a 17-year-old hitchhiker, had been fined £2,000 by Judge Bernard Richard, who alleged the victim's "contributory negligence".
There is currently a consultation by the CPS on the offence of rape by deception and some of what it says is a bit worrying. It is showing a tendency to retreat to attitudes somewhat similar to those expressed by those Korean men.
Attitudes don't change easily. South Korea is, I think, still at least = changing in the right direction - note it was a deeply Confucian, feudal agrarian society until very recently.
I can see no justification for taxpayers paying for Johnson's legal bills over this.
Boris will be Boris. He's special.
The irony of all this negativity swirling around Johnson is the loser seems to be Sunak, and Johnson's stock rises amongst those who will vote to replace Sunak with Johnson. Strange days indeed.
I am increasingly convinced that Boris Johnson entered into a pact with Satan. It is the only explanation that makes sense.
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..
I am curious about the reference to "abusive husband" in the Mirror's headline about Raab yesterday. It is quite the innuendo. Was it just the work of an overenthusiastic headline writer? Or is there more to this story?
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.
I would rather break up a Communion which has only been around 150 years and effectively ended with the end of the British Empire anyway then disestablish the Church of England which has been the established Church for 500 years. Most non evangelicals in the Church of England will feel the same.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
A sort of "Church Brexit"?
Chexit?
No, that was the Reformation.
Even now most Eurozone nations are Roman Catholic heritage, most non Eurozone or non EU western European nations are Protestant heritage
Germany being the rather notable exception and representing ~30% of the Eurozone economy, and 20% of the entire EU population.
ETA: (For clarity, I am not contradicting you; there are a plurality of continuing-Catholic-heritage states in the EU; just that it is actually a more even split than people might read into your statement)
True, though Bavaria has always been Roman Catholic heritage of course.
True - although actually "no religion" is the plurality (unlike the UK where Christianity is still hanging on in there!)
Though in the UK Christianity is treated as one religion for statistical purposes as far as I can tell. I'm pretty sure that is it was split down even into RC, Anglican and "other Christian", then "no religion" would be the plurality.
It would be. However if you also split up Christians by denomination you have to split up Muslims into Sunni and Shia and even non religious into atheists and agnostics 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.
The schism caused by permitting gay marriage would destroy the church of England as we know it.
I can see no justification for taxpayers paying for Johnson's legal bills over this.
Boris will be Boris. He's special.
The irony of all this negativity swirling around Johnson is the loser seems to be Sunak, and Johnson's stock rises amongst those who will vote to replace Sunak with Johnson. Strange days indeed.
I am increasingly convinced that Boris Johnson entered into a pact with Satan. It is the only explanation that makes sense.
More likely he is a selfish, manipulative, narcissistic twat with a fair amount of the brand of charm that works well on key sections of British high society.
Why? Because avian flu, in humans, has a mortality rate of about 60%. It is the Black Death, 2.0
Unless and until it mutates to allow widespread human to human transmission, it's no such thing. And until it does, we have little idea of what its mortality rate might be.
But I agree it's a serious concern. I posted a report of the outbreak in a mink farm, fairly recently. Arguably the perfect place in which to incubate a mammalian version of the virus.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
A Ukrainian win of any sorts could be channeled by Johnson as a personal Churchillian victory. It could well be a Falklands Factor.
I noted from Nick Ferrari this morning that Johnson is on manouvres. They were interviewing Eddie Lister who was anticipating a good chance of a Johnson return. Johnson, he claims is the greatest orator in the HoC (which I would refute) and his Prime Ministerial campaigning brilliance (I can't discount that) could ensure the Tories are rewarded.
If Johnson really is "the greatest orator in the House of Commons", it is a sad lookout for the current state of the HoC. He demonstrated himself to be really quite feeble in that regard.
But I appreciate that the narrative and the reality don't have to match if you just repeat the lie often enough.
I think Boris could give quite good pre-prepared speeches. When it came to thinking on his feet and responding to questions, however, he could be fairly poor.
Are there any tub-thumping orators left in the Commons?
The one that springs to mind is Michael Gove closing the no confidence debate a few years ago.
I think Penny Mordaunt is pretty good. Compared to ealrier times there is a paucity of tyalent across the House.
I can see no justification for taxpayers paying for Johnson's legal bills over this.
Boris will be Boris. He's special.
The irony of all this negativity swirling around Johnson is the loser seems to be Sunak, and Johnson's stock rises amongst those who will vote to replace Sunak with Johnson. Strange days indeed.
I am increasingly convinced that Boris Johnson entered into a pact with Satan. It is the only explanation that makes sense.
If he did he really should have checked the small print more carefully. But then, we all know he would not do that.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
A Ukrainian win of any sorts could be channeled by Johnson as a personal Churchillian victory. It could well be a Falklands Factor.
I noted from Nick Ferrari this morning that Johnson is on manouvres. They were interviewing Eddie Lister who was anticipating a good chance of a Johnson return. Johnson, he claims is the greatest orator in the HoC (which I would refute) and his Prime Ministerial campaigning brilliance (I can't discount that) could ensure the Tories are rewarded.
If Johnson really is "the greatest orator in the House of Commons", it is a sad lookout for the current state of the HoC. He demonstrated himself to be really quite feeble in that regard.
But I appreciate that the narrative and the reality don't have to match if you just repeat the lie often enough.
I think Boris could give quite good pre-prepared speeches. When it came to thinking on his feet and responding to questions, however, he could be fairly poor.
Are there any tub-thumping orators left in the Commons?
The one that springs to mind is Michael Gove closing the no confidence debate a few years ago.
I think Penny Mordaunt is pretty good. Compared to earlier times there is a paucity of talent across the House.
Ed Miliband has somewhat surprisingly become a pretty good Commons performer, too. Though agreed that rising above the average doesn't require anything particularly remarkable these days.
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.
The schism caused by permitting gay marriage would destroy the church of England as we know it.
I think that is the point. The Church of England as we know it doesn't allow SSM so yes you are right.
Would that be a good or a bad thing? Way above my pay grade.
I can see no justification for taxpayers paying for Johnson's legal bills over this.
Boris will be Boris. He's special.
The irony of all this negativity swirling around Johnson is the loser seems to be Sunak, and Johnson's stock rises amongst those who will vote to replace Sunak with Johnson. Strange days indeed.
I am increasingly convinced that Boris Johnson entered into a pact with Satan. It is the only explanation that makes sense.
More likely he is a selfish, manipulative, narcissistic twat with a fair amount of the brand of charm that works well on key sections of British high society.
Yes, but I think this could apply to Starmer as well (with less charm). They are both towards the upper end of the psychopath traits scale IMO.
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
So you are not going to concede because we are rude and pompous even if we are right? OK that is logical.
Regarding being rude and pompous you might like to see how I and @ydoethur communicate and argue with others and see whether it is us or you who has a problem. I refer you to a joke post by Robert a few months ago who jokingly said he was going to ban 3 individuals for being too reasonable. I was one of those 3. As usual you don't have any self awareness. It is always others, never yourself.
I come here to discuss issues and politics. All too frequently it becomes personal with you and increasingly Ydoethur and that has been commented on by others.
There you again with your lack of self awareness.
a) You are often very rude to us, but you are unaware of it. It can cause a reaction back.
b) Our reaction to you is usually because of your complete lack of self awareness and your irrationality so we get utterly frustrated. Look at the discussions we have with others. None are the same. Why do you think that is? I know you think it is because you are the only Tory on the site but that is not true and often it is not about politics at all anyway - it is your go to defence and is wrong.
c) Commented on by others? Again an example of your lack of awareness. Have a look at any of these discussions and see. Look at the likes, look at the numbers agreeing with you or us. The only negatives we tend to get is with people suggesting we just give up as it is pointless and boring to them, with which I agree, so I am conflicted there. One of the problems in this area is you don't seem to get irony or sarcasm. Numerous times I have seen you like something which was actually not supporting your view but being ironic or sarcastic and you just don't get it.
Anyway lets stop as this is not a discussion on politics or an issue as you rightly say, but each of us analysing each other and neither of us are qualified to do that.
One point I would like to make though is I have gone out of my way over the last few weeks to 'like' or compliment you on a number of your posts with which I agree to build bridges.
I'm guessing this post will be a waste of time, but it was worth a shot. I'm guessing you are just going to respond with I'm being pompous again or it is because I am a liberal and you are a Tory. Neither are relevant.
Just leave it at that then
OK will do. Good response by the way. Sorry my reply was a bit rambling and was meant to be conciliatory, but probably didn't come over as such when I re-read it for which I apologise.
Another thought I had, and I know how much you like statistics, have you thought of looking at the 'likes' ratio for the 3 of us to see what PBers think of our respective posts?
I can see no justification for taxpayers paying for Johnson's legal bills over this.
Boris will be Boris. He's special.
The irony of all this negativity swirling around Johnson is the loser seems to be Sunak, and Johnson's stock rises amongst those who will vote to replace Sunak with Johnson. Strange days indeed.
I am increasingly convinced that Boris Johnson entered into a pact with Satan. It is the only explanation that makes sense.
If he did he really should have checked the small print more carefully. But then, we all know he would not do that.
When you wrote “he “should’ve checked the small print more carefully did you mean Satan or Boris?
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.
“It’s been tough, but it’s now about the next few years - here’s our plan, it’s simple: years of growth and tax cuts for you, starting with the one we’ve just given you. Why would you vote for Labours plan, they haven’t shared a clear vision or plan and bits they have shared are dreadful, are they are more interested in abolishing the House of Lords and transgender rights than growth and lower taxes? If Labour get hold of the economy they will trample these clear green shoots of recovery we have all paid so much to now have.”
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.
The schism caused by permitting gay marriage would destroy the church of England as we know it.
@squareroot2 did you see my reply to you yesterday re the FAS and PAG. My apologies if you did reply. Are you a member of PAG?
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
I don't really see how. Even if tomorrow the Russians say 'right lads, pack your bags, we're off' it won't normalise relations and they will still want to keep gas sanctions. And we'll then be on the hook for rebuilding the sodding place.
A nuclear war might considerably reduce the number of safe Labour seats but its hard to imagine the Boundaries Commission doing much about that before 2050.
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.
The schism caused by permitting gay marriage would destroy the church of England as we know it.
There is a complex relationship between Church and State, including law and Parliament.
General Synod is sometimes styled as the third chamber of Parliament, which is not fully justified yet law changes passed by General Synod require approval in Parliament - normally on the nod by convention. But presumably that convention could be laid aside in extremis and Parliament could modify Canon Law itself. That would be a crisis .
There are also some things they do better than Parliament, such as debating as one group before voting by houses of Clergy, Laity, Episcopacy.
Cameron tickled it when he rushed Gay Marriage through without addressing a lot of the implications, but introduced a fairly crude exception rather than sweat the detail.
There's also the separate planning system for major denominations, which also extends to the Methodist Church, Baptist Union etc.
I haven't visited the issue for a few years, but I was surprised how the CofE was standing back from Gay Marriage in Church, or at least something less formal like Blessings after a ceremony elsewhere, with their recent report; I was expecting more movement, observing how people from the evangelical wing I have known for 30+ years have been in general liberalising their views over time.
There is nothing really Sunak can do in the short term to improve Tory polling but I am sure he knows that and is playing the longer game. A lot can change in two years so he’s clearly better off spending a year getting the public finances in a solid position and then start a raft of targeted tax cuts, not at the wealthy, but in a way where the most people who are waverers benefit and see a real increase in their pocket.
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
The biggest of the black swans would appear to be the Ukr-Rus conflict.
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
I don't really see how. Even if tomorrow the Russians say 'right lads, pack your bags, we're off' it won't normalise relations and they will still want to keep gas sanctions. And we'll then be on the hook for rebuilding the sodding place.
I don’t want to be a dismal Jimmy over this, but assuming a massive rebuilding program in Ukraine and consequently investment from outside, what would be the chances of Putin’s successor having another go in 20 years time? It’s not as if there were not historic ties between Russia and Ukraine!
Slim to zero surely. Russia will have been utterly humiliated and Ukraine will have been majorly developed to the point of being in NATO by then either officially or unofficially.
Russia thought they were 'the big I am' in their 'sphere of influence' which ought to include Ukraine. Now they rudely know better, as do their neighbours who won't let themselves be in a position to be exposed to an invasion quite frankly.
I think you also have to factor in the increasing strength of Poland as a regional power, as touched on in this place a few days ago. That has to be a further deterrent.
More that Poland is trying to build an alliance of Eastern European states against Russian er... interest in the area.
I would be very surprised *not* to see a massive investment in arms *production* shared between the countries involved.
Ukraine needs more artillery and airpower. In fact, it needs more of everything.
Pretty much confirms the account on Reddit from that Canadian mercenary who killed 15 people on Xmas Day in Bakhmut. LOL. 🎅🎄🎁.
The Musicians send a small squad of 5-8 guys forward. AFU lights them up. Russians shell the AFU position. Repeat until the AFU position is abandoned or just totally destroyed. Russians advance 500m and do it again.
Comments
The attitude is “can you use it?”
He needs to then push a big investment and growth drive by reverting to the plan of huge corp tax offsets for investment and even look into some form of “British Infrastructure Investment Bonds” (think War Bonds) where the money raised is hypothecated purely for big infrastructure projects mixed between state/council projects and grants to enterprises - pick winners.
Cheaper than PFI but if coupon is attractive enough after solid sensible financial management then will be attractive.
By having shown markets and the world that he is sensible and “sound money” he will have built up trust with them and should be able to get tax changes etc through without a Truss style market attack.
His pitch would need to be along the lines of “I know it’s been very tough for the country these last few years but everyone knuckled down and took a lot of pain so I’m now able to reward the sacrifice by ensuring you keep more of your money but also we’ve shown we can live within our means and so it’s time to give your communities the benefits of that and so our investment bonds will be building your needed new roads, hospitals blah blah blah”.
If he’s able to make tax cuts, go for growth and investment then he has the added bonus of being able to lance the boil of a lot of the party nutters and be able to start shedding them which will help improve the perception of the tories.
Also two years is a long time where black swans will likely happen - worst for Labour and best for Tories would be (and I’m not wishing it on him) Star er having to step down for health reasons and then a Labour gunfight with Rayner taking over who I really believe would put off a lot of wavering former Tory voters.
Having written the above it’s clearly bollocks and it will be a Labour majority.
A new Anglican Communion could then be formed by the C of E with the other British and US churches and the North American and Oceanic churches
Chexit?
Regarding being rude and pompous you might like to see how I and @ydoethur communicate and argue with others and see whether it is us or you who has a problem. I refer you to a joke post by Robert a few months ago who jokingly said he was going to ban 3 individuals for being too reasonable. I was one of those 3. As usual you don't have any self awareness. It is always others, never yourself.
British Gas breaking into the homes of single mums to install coin meters.
Nothing to see here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thameslink
I've never seen a teacher with £125m held offshore, not paying any tax
https://www.thameslinkrailway.com/
"Otters and foxes have now been found with avian flu in the UK
But we're still "a long way" from being in a situation where the disease could infect humans and spread in a similar way to Covid, health experts say"
https://twitter.com/BloombergUK/status/1621084797907996672?s=20&t=fWyBp2M8U9Yf_2xSG8dxFQ
Why? Because avian flu, in humans, has a mortality rate of about 60%. It is the Black Death, 2.0
On topic, the Tories are done. They have no idea what they are for any more. If they were to try and behave competently and honourably in the time left they could go down to an honourable defeat. But they seem determined to do the opposite so a total - or near total - wipe out cannot be ruled out.
Labour having a large majority will be a very bad thing because such governments quickly become arrogant and hubristic and because our system requires an effective opposition. So I expect the incompetence, poor governance, conflicts of interest and corruption to continue. It'll just have a different flavour.
Even now most Eurozone nations are Roman Catholic heritage, most non Eurozone or non EU western European nations are Protestant heritage
That has quite a wide range of possible outcomes and may impact on the GE 2024 in ways hard to predict.
Good.
I can see no justification for taxpayers paying for Johnson's legal bills over this.
ETA: (For clarity, I am not contradicting you; there are a plurality of continuing-Catholic-heritage states in the EU; just that it is actually a more even split than people might read into your statement)
I noted from Nick Ferrari this morning that Johnson is on manouvres. They were interviewing Eddie Lister who was anticipating a good chance of a Johnson return. Johnson, he claims is the greatest orator in the HoC (which I would refute) and his Prime Ministerial campaigning brilliance (I can't discount that) could ensure the Tories are rewarded.
Our local station is on one of Thameslink's southern spurs. It is a great service, offering regular trains to Blackfriars, the city, Farringdon (connection to Elizabeth Line and Heathrow) and King's Cross/St Pancras (trains to France and Scotland).
"More than 2,800 people may be working as nurses under false pretenses after allegedly buying a fake diploma for between $10,000 and $15,000 from a massive Florida-based scheme recently busted by federal investigators"
https://arstechnica.com/science/2023/02/2800-fake-nurses-lurk-in-the-us-states-are-working-to-track-them-down/
But I appreciate that the narrative and the reality don't have to match if you just repeat the lie often enough.
https://www.ianvisits.co.uk/articles/british-library-extension-to-include-large-crossrail-2-tunnels-53546/
It’s not as if there were not historic ties between Russia and Ukraine!
If you can pay a fraction of the cost, get the paper to claim you have a degree, and get your foot in the door - it may be criminal but its almost worthy of respect. Almost.
We should fix the problems at root cause.
Are there any tub-thumping orators left in the Commons?
I don't really know if we have too many or too few of such people in our NHS, but would be fairly confident that the politicians in charge don't know either and simply regurgitate these calls out of ideoligical stubborness.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-64226405
There was a case a few years ago where someone didn't have a medical degree but they had passed all the training thereafter.
Russia thought they were 'the big I am' in their 'sphere of influence' which ought to include Ukraine. Now they rudely know better, as do their neighbours who won't let themselves be in a position to be exposed to an invasion quite frankly.
Wouldn't that be one where one where we don't seek windows into souls and allow people to be in the EU in practice just not in theory?
(Shades of the old Hard ECU / Parallel currencies idea, I suppose...)
In that time frame, I think Ukrainian military preparedness and experience would also remain "very high", and any kind of significant operation would be challenging for a Russia still suffering from a wide range of legacy sanctions and a decreasing demand for their hydrocarbons.
We'd be much more likely to see assorted dirty tricks of the old-fashioned insurgency kind.
What other kind of preparation is there?!
But the question is what will Russia be like in twenty years? Even if it remains intact as a country (not a given), it has relied on hydrocarbon money for a few decades, and has not invested that money wisely. As the world economy decarbonises, Russia's income will reduce.
This war is killing thousands of Ukrainians, but it is destroying Russia's reputation and future.
Mr Cole, Ireland has quite a history with us but I doubt it means we can re-invade at will.
If you want "chill" then there's a simple way to get that, Russia withdraws back to its recognised 1991 borders. The end.
a) You are often very rude to us, but you are unaware of it. It can cause a reaction back.
b) Our reaction to you is usually because of your complete lack of self awareness and your irrationality so we get utterly frustrated. Look at the discussions we have with others. None are the same. Why do you think that is? I know you think it is because you are the only Tory on the site but that is not true and often it is not about politics at all anyway - it is your go to defence and is wrong.
c) Commented on by others? Again an example of your lack of awareness. Have a look at any of these discussions and see. Look at the likes, look at the numbers agreeing with you or us. The only negatives we tend to get is with people suggesting we just give up as it is pointless and boring to them, with which I agree, so I am conflicted there. One of the problems in this area is you don't seem to get irony or sarcasm. Numerous times I have seen you like something which was actually not supporting your view but being ironic or sarcastic and you just don't get it.
Anyway lets stop as this is not a discussion on politics or an issue as you rightly say, but each of us analysing each other and neither of us are qualified to do that.
One point I would like to make though is I have gone out of my way over the last few weeks to 'like' or compliment you on a number of your posts with which I agree to build bridges.
I'm guessing this post will be a waste of time, but it was worth a shot. I'm guessing you are just going to respond with I'm being pompous again or it is because I am a liberal and you are a Tory. Neither are relevant.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/feb/02/shell-profits-2022-surging-oil-prices-gas-ukraine
FWIW, I recognise the risks of stepping in to regulate this further. But I also see the risks and distortion effects of profits this size, particularly in the way it funnels money from the economy as a whole into the pockets of a smaller group of richer individuals, who are then able to distort markets such as the housing market in London, because of their excess wealth.
Yes, I know institutional investors, pension funds etc are a thing and profits like this can be good for them, and I'm not dismissing that angle, I just don't think it's the whole story.
Plus even in Germany Roman Catholics are now the plurality, 26% to 24% for the Evangelical Lutheran Church
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Germany
With a fake diploma and transcript, an unscrupulous aspiring nurse can qualify to take the national nursing board exam. And if they pass the exam, they can become licensed nurses and get a job in a health care setting. Federal authorities reported that of the 7,600 people with the alleged fake diplomas, around 37 percent—more than 2,800 people—passed the exam. Many went on to get jobs as licensed nurses.
So it does sound like a gatekeeping qualification needed in order to take the final exam. One wonders how many had qualified in Central or South American countries whose qualifications are not recognised by the United States, as opposed to just walking in off the streets.
I can cook dinner without having done any preparation, simply doing it all on the fly. Or I can prepare dinner on the day just before I am going to cook it, or I can pre-prepare it in advance the day before.
Pre-prepare means to prepare something in advance of when you'd need to prepare it. Hence its etymology, pre-prepare.
{the West Midlands Serious Crimes Squad has entered the chat, and stolen everything}
The irony of all this negativity swirling around Johnson is the loser seems to be Sunak, and Johnson's stock rises amongst those who will vote to replace Sunak with Johnson. Strange days indeed.
Just Germany has fewer Muslims, Hindus and unsurprisingly Jews than the UK too
Bozza, for example, has always been saved by either a) good editors (Telegraph or television) or b) his audience being half-cut.
South Korea is, I think, still at least = changing in the right direction - note it was a deeply Confucian, feudal agrarian society until very recently.
I'd forgotten just how recently it was in the UK that marital rape was determined to be a crime.
https://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1991/12.html
Even more recently (2013) in Korea.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140111190520/http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/national/2013/05/16/3/0302000000AEN20130516003100315F.HTML
But I agree it's a serious concern.
I posted a report of the outbreak in a mink farm, fairly recently. Arguably the perfect place in which to incubate a mammalian version of the virus.
https://twitter.com/ChrisO_wiki/status/1621095382771175426
Ukraine needs more artillery and airpower. In fact, it needs more of everything.
Would that be a good or a bad thing? Way above my pay grade.
https://twitter.com/JudiciaryDems/status/1620506658047922176
Just ridiculous that this didn't become law decades ago.
Another thought I had, and I know how much you like statistics, have you thought of looking at the 'likes' ratio for the 3 of us to see what PBers think of our respective posts?
Even though nobody asked for it, here it is: RICHARD MILHOUSE NIXON AS THE BEST PICTURE NOMINEES!
https://twitter.com/FutureHasbeen/status/1620894123384516608
General Synod is sometimes styled as the third chamber of Parliament, which is not fully justified yet law changes passed by General Synod require approval in Parliament - normally on the nod by convention. But presumably that convention could be laid aside in extremis and Parliament could modify Canon Law itself. That would be a crisis
There are also some things they do better than Parliament, such as debating as one group before voting by houses of Clergy, Laity, Episcopacy.
Cameron tickled it when he rushed Gay Marriage through without addressing a lot of the implications, but introduced a fairly crude exception rather than sweat the detail.
There's also the separate planning system for major denominations, which also extends to the Methodist Church, Baptist Union etc.
I haven't visited the issue for a few years, but I was surprised how the CofE was standing back from Gay Marriage in Church, or at least something less formal like Blessings after a ceremony elsewhere, with their recent report; I was expecting more movement, observing how people from the evangelical wing I have known for 30+ years have been in general liberalising their views over time.
I would be very surprised *not* to see a massive investment in arms *production* shared between the countries involved.
The Musicians send a small squad of 5-8 guys forward. AFU lights them up. Russians shell the AFU position. Repeat until the AFU position is abandoned or just totally destroyed. Russians advance 500m and do it again.
https://twitter.com/scottish_tweets/status/1621104769946292224?s=61&t=Vtgl5Yc1LJi1Ayo6C9PdaQ