That interview with Mr Sunak yesterday was toe-curling. How can anyone think he would get through an intensive General Election campaign? Who is advising him?
The irony of Mr Seely going on TV to defend the line and being caught lieing about what he himself said on the same programme a week before is remarkable.
So who comes out of this looking good? Penny Mordaunt - a woman who was rejected for leader due to 'culture war' issues. My oh my. With friends like the culture warriors what political party needs enemies!
Meanwhile, outside the Westminster/PB bubble, an update from my local association:
Disappointment that our MP voted with Labour. Donors and activists angry and deflated. Calls for Sunak to be replaced.
Your continued reminder that whilst Sunak is popular here, and 'supported' by people who wouldn't dream of voting for him, the only time we've had a proper, working majority for the Tory party since PB began is when Boris Johnson went to the country in 2019.
Yougov polling was clear yesterday: 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris.
That is how unpopular Sunak is....
The Tory party have a problem with their members, just as the Labour party had under Corbyn. They are cuckoos in the nest.
Starmer was able to kick them out or at least neutralise them. Which leader of the Conservatives can do the same? Sunak seems too weak to do it. My money is on Mordaunt. But will the current Tory members allow her to be leader to cleanse them?
LOL. Given the members select the MPs, I suspect there is more chance of the PCP changing than the membership.
Those who gave Labour a big victory yesterday will be facing angry executives soon. There will almost certainly be some MPs looking for jobs elsewhere I should imagine.
Looking increasingly likely AUS may not get there by 80 overs which could give ENG a chance with second new ball. If AUS have established batters then, then this won't help ENG but it could do if they are say 7 or 8 down with new batters.
Am I a dinosaur for preferring 'batsman' to 'batter'? Batter is a flour mixture.
Often teams get bowled out quickly after tea on the last day. About one hour to tea. Hopefully get one more wicket say 175-5 at tea and quick wrap up afterwards?
That interview with Mr Sunak yesterday was toe-curling. How can anyone think he would get through an intensive General Election campaign? Who is advising him?
The irony of Mr Seely going on TV to defend the line and being caught lieing about what he himself said on the same programme a week before is remarkable.
So who comes out of this looking good? Penny Mordaunt - a woman who was rejected for leader due to 'culture war' issues. My oh my. With friends like the culture warriors what political party needs enemies!
Meanwhile, outside the Westminster/PB bubble, an update from my local association:
Disappointment that our MP voted with Labour. Donors and activists angry and deflated. Calls for Sunak to be replaced.
Your continued reminder that whilst Sunak is popular here, and 'supported' by people who wouldn't dream of voting for him, the only time we've had a proper, working majority for the Tory party since PB began is when Boris Johnson went to the country in 2019.
Yougov polling was clear yesterday: 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris.
That is how unpopular Sunak is....
Hmm sorry but that reminds me of how the pro -european bunch were prior to 2016.
"Noone cares about Europe"
Given PB Tories are not generally representative of the membership at large, I'd say its the pro-Sunakites who are sounding like the pre 2016 pro Europeans
That interview with Mr Sunak yesterday was toe-curling. How can anyone think he would get through an intensive General Election campaign? Who is advising him?
The irony of Mr Seely going on TV to defend the line and being caught lieing about what he himself said on the same programme a week before is remarkable.
So who comes out of this looking good? Penny Mordaunt - a woman who was rejected for leader due to 'culture war' issues. My oh my. With friends like the culture warriors what political party needs enemies!
Meanwhile, outside the Westminster/PB bubble, an update from my local association:
Disappointment that our MP voted with Labour. Donors and activists angry and deflated. Calls for Sunak to be replaced.
Your continued reminder that whilst Sunak is popular here, and 'supported' by people who wouldn't dream of voting for him, the only time we've had a proper, working majority for the Tory party since PB began is when Boris Johnson went to the country in 2019.
Yougov polling was clear yesterday: 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris.
That is how unpopular Sunak is....
The Tory party have a problem with their members, just as the Labour party had under Corbyn. They are cuckoos in the nest.
Starmer was able to kick them out or at least neutralise them. Which leader of the Conservatives can do the same? Sunak seems too weak to do it. My money is on Mordaunt. But will the current Tory members allow her to be leader to cleanse them?
LOL. Given the members select the MPs, I suspect there is more chance of the PCP changing than the membership.
Those who gave Labour a big victory yesterday will be facing angry executives soon. There will almost certainly be some MPs looking for jobs elsewhere I should imagine.
The committee was majority Tory, led by brexiteer Sir Bernard Jenkin. & I'm fairly sure the line (Which is true) is that the average person doesn't really care about this, so quite how it's a 'big victory for Labour' I'm not sure. Was the Ferrier suspension a 'big victory' for the union ?
Prince Michael of Kent’s private office lobbied a senior Foreign Office official to help obtain a fast-track UK visa for a Russian financier closely linked to a sanctioned oligarch, The Times can reveal.
The equerry of the prince, the late Queen’s cousin, emailed a diplomat in Moscow asking him if he could “expedite” an application by Maxim Viktorov, a 50-year-old businessman. Viktorov was able to get on a flight to London arriving six days later.
At the time of the intervention in 2018, the prince was the global ambassador and part owner of a UK finance firm that was in the process of securing £100,000 of investment from an organisation run by Viktorov.
That interview with Mr Sunak yesterday was toe-curling. How can anyone think he would get through an intensive General Election campaign? Who is advising him?
The irony of Mr Seely going on TV to defend the line and being caught lieing about what he himself said on the same programme a week before is remarkable.
So who comes out of this looking good? Penny Mordaunt - a woman who was rejected for leader due to 'culture war' issues. My oh my. With friends like the culture warriors what political party needs enemies!
Meanwhile, outside the Westminster/PB bubble, an update from my local association:
Disappointment that our MP voted with Labour. Donors and activists angry and deflated. Calls for Sunak to be replaced.
Your continued reminder that whilst Sunak is popular here, and 'supported' by people who wouldn't dream of voting for him, the only time we've had a proper, working majority for the Tory party since PB began is when Boris Johnson went to the country in 2019.
Yougov polling was clear yesterday: 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris.
That is how unpopular Sunak is....
The Tory party have a problem with their members, just as the Labour party had under Corbyn. They are cuckoos in the nest.
Starmer was able to kick them out or at least neutralise them. Which leader of the Conservatives can do the same? Sunak seems too weak to do it. My money is on Mordaunt. But will the current Tory members allow her to be leader to cleanse them?
LOL. Given the members select the MPs, I suspect there is more chance of the PCP changing than the membership.
Those who gave Labour a big victory yesterday will be facing angry executives soon. There will almost certainly be some MPs looking for jobs elsewhere I should imagine.
The committee was majority Tory, led by brexiteer Sir Bernard Jenkin. & I'm fairly sure the line (Which is true) is that the average person doesn't really care about this, so quite how it's a 'big victory for Labour' I'm not sure. Was the Ferrier suspension a 'big victory' for the union ?
Voting with the opposition doesn't go down well in Tory associations, generally...
It was seen as vindictive by many Tory members.
But this is all besides the point.
Polling shows that Tory 2019 voters prefer Johnson to Sunak. In the LEs we did worse than CCHQ's expectation management.
Looking increasingly likely AUS may not get there by 80 overs which could give ENG a chance with second new ball. If AUS have established batters then, then this won't help ENG but it could do if they are say 7 or 8 down with new batters.
Am I a dinosaur for preferring 'batsman' to 'batter'? Batter is a flour mixture.
Perfectly normal to prefer some words to others, especially those more familiar with which will sound more natural. It gets a bit weird when taken too far and some start to resent and object to recent changes in language. Language evolves, changes and develops, always has, always will.
Thatcher Blair Major Cameron May Brown Sunak Johnson Truss
You are very kind to Cameron, who I think is the PM whose stock has fallen the most since leaving office.
My list would be
Blair (despite Iraq) Thatcher Major Brown May Sunak Cameron Johnson Truss
Fun game.
My list would be.
Thatcher Cameron Major Johnson Blair Sunak May Truss Brown
And yes, I wanted Johnson out before he left and would not want him back, but I'd say the same to everyone I ranked below him too.
Truss above Brown for what reason? Colour of rosette?
No, not colour of rosette, I put Blair ahead of Sunak, May and Truss.
Truss ahead of Brown as she was removed before she did too much damage. She was bad, I called for her to resign before she did, but she was quickly ousted before much worse happened.
Her Premiership was like stepping on a piece of Lego. Short and painful but quickly over.
The legacy of Gordon Brown was far more toxic and far more long-lasting. It needed a decade of austerity to clean up his mess.
But the toxic legacy of Gordon Brown was more due to his time as Chancellor than that of his time as PM.
It is judging of them as PM not overall.
Indeed, it is hard to separate the two, which is why I rated Blair down in only 5th spot, he's down-rated due to Brown's legacy as Chancellor. Had it not been for Brown as Chancellor I'd have Blair up higher.
But Brown made matters even worse as PM. He completely botched the financial crisis by bailing out the failed banks, rather than allowing them to go bust and protecting guaranteed creditors instead like Iceland did.
That added much more debt than was necessary to an already bad problem and completely warped the market by suggesting that firms were too big to fail and making moral hazard a major problem.
Don't forget Brown is a war criminal who should be in the dock at the Hague alongside Blair.
As for Cameron, in his farewell speech to the Commons he focused on the introduction of gay marriage as a major achievement of his seven years in office. He only looks good compared with the four incompetents who succeeded him. And insofar as he was on the right side of the argument about EU membership.
Anyone who suggests either Blair or Brown is a war criminal is outing themselves as ridiculous.
And yes, Cameron deserves massive praise for introduction of equal marriage rights. 👍
He said it was the achievement he was most proud of. And I'll resist the obvious comment of 'from a short list' because it was an achievement and he's right to feel that way.
Particularly against the majority of his MPs; nowadays the PM is running scared of a minority of his.
'Dave' masked it for a while but the Tory Party seem to be uncomfortable with the modern world again. Not sure about Sunak at all. I find it hard to get a read on what he's all about. When he took over I was a bit worried he might be very good but no, he decidedly isn't. Phew.
Yes, but sorry to break it to you, but podgy Kier will be worse. Unlike Sunak, he knows fuck all about business and he has failed (unlike Blair) to make up for that massive deficit by surrounding himself with people that do. I hope I am wrong, but I expect to see the economy improve a little on the optimism of a change of government but then for it to tank under the mismanagement of people that have even less understanding of how an economy and business works that Peppa Pig Boy and Lizzy Lightweight combined.
In that case, let me put you out of your misery: you are wrong.
The Shadow Chancellor worked as an economist for the Bank of England, the UK embassy in Washington DC and Halifax Bank of Scotland before entering the Commons. She also chaired the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee from 2017 to 2020. These are not the hallmarks of a wide-eyed ingenue that “knows fuck all about business”, are they?
Wind your bloody neck in, for Pete’s sake.
Good heavens facts! Are you sure you've come to the right place?
I'm thinking of writing a little primer on the oil & gas industry: porosity, permeability, water injection, artificial lift, hydraulic fracturing, etc.
Looking increasingly likely AUS may not get there by 80 overs which could give ENG a chance with second new ball. If AUS have established batters then, then this won't help ENG but it could do if they are say 7 or 8 down with new batters.
Am I a dinosaur for preferring 'batsman' to 'batter'? Batter is a flour mixture.
I'm thinking of writing a little primer on the oil & gas industry: porosity, permeability, water injection, artificial lift, hydraulic fracturing, etc.
That interview with Mr Sunak yesterday was toe-curling. How can anyone think he would get through an intensive General Election campaign? Who is advising him?
The irony of Mr Seely going on TV to defend the line and being caught lieing about what he himself said on the same programme a week before is remarkable.
So who comes out of this looking good? Penny Mordaunt - a woman who was rejected for leader due to 'culture war' issues. My oh my. With friends like the culture warriors what political party needs enemies!
Meanwhile, outside the Westminster/PB bubble, an update from my local association:
Disappointment that our MP voted with Labour. Donors and activists angry and deflated. Calls for Sunak to be replaced.
Your continued reminder that whilst Sunak is popular here, and 'supported' by people who wouldn't dream of voting for him, the only time we've had a proper, working majority for the Tory party since PB began is when Boris Johnson went to the country in 2019.
Yougov polling was clear yesterday: 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris.
That is how unpopular Sunak is....
The Tory party have a problem with their members, just as the Labour party had under Corbyn. They are cuckoos in the nest.
Starmer was able to kick them out or at least neutralise them. Which leader of the Conservatives can do the same? Sunak seems too weak to do it. My money is on Mordaunt. But will the current Tory members allow her to be leader to cleanse them?
LOL. Given the members select the MPs, I suspect there is more chance of the PCP changing than the membership.
Those who gave Labour a big victory yesterday will be facing angry executives soon. There will almost certainly be some MPs looking for jobs elsewhere I should imagine.
The committee was majority Tory, led by brexiteer Sir Bernard Jenkin. & I'm fairly sure the line (Which is true) is that the average person doesn't really care about this, so quite how it's a 'big victory for Labour' I'm not sure. Was the Ferrier suspension a 'big victory' for the union ?
Voting with the opposition doesn't go down well in Tory associations, generally...
It was seen as vindictive by many Tory members.
But this is all besides the point.
Polling shows that Tory 2019 voters prefer Johnson to Sunak. In the LEs we did worse than CCHQ's expectation management.
They both shows to me how unelectable he is.
No Tory is electable right now.
The only possible path to redemption is for Sunak to renounce everything that has happened these years past - or be replaced by someone like Mordaunt more able to to the same - and then be seen to hug as many huskies as possible hoping voters will forget the shitshow we’ve all been subjected to since 2015. And hoping that Starmer’s ‘boring accountant’ impression doesn’t cut the mustard with voters who are seriously worried in serious times.
It’s a long shot, but nevertheless the only game in town.
One of Sunak’s significant handicaps is that he probably does believe in Brexit, despite most of his so-called friends thinking that he doesn’t.
I'm thinking of writing a little primer on the oil & gas industry: porosity, permeability, water injection, artificial lift, hydraulic fracturing, etc.
Would you care to help me on it?
Of course, it'd probably end up being more like five or six different pieces, because it's a big industry!
Looking increasingly likely AUS may not get there by 80 overs which could give ENG a chance with second new ball. If AUS have established batters then, then this won't help ENG but it could do if they are say 7 or 8 down with new batters.
Am I a dinosaur for preferring 'batsman' to 'batter'? Batter is a flour mixture.
Perfectly normal to prefer some words to others, especially those more familiar with which will sound more natural. It gets a bit weird when taken too far and some start to resent and object to recent changes in language. Language evolves, changes and develops, always has, always will.
We don't have "chair-er" though. It just seems a bit odd.
Anyway, the Australians seem to be very quiet bat-people at the moment. Are they playing for a draw?
Thatcher Blair Major Cameron May Brown Sunak Johnson Truss
You are very kind to Cameron, who I think is the PM whose stock has fallen the most since leaving office.
My list would be
Blair (despite Iraq) Thatcher Major Brown May Sunak Cameron Johnson Truss
Fun game.
My list would be.
Thatcher Cameron Major Johnson Blair Sunak May Truss Brown
And yes, I wanted Johnson out before he left and would not want him back, but I'd say the same to everyone I ranked below him too.
Truss above Brown for what reason? Colour of rosette?
No, not colour of rosette, I put Blair ahead of Sunak, May and Truss.
Truss ahead of Brown as she was removed before she did too much damage. She was bad, I called for her to resign before she did, but she was quickly ousted before much worse happened.
Her Premiership was like stepping on a piece of Lego. Short and painful but quickly over.
The legacy of Gordon Brown was far more toxic and far more long-lasting. It needed a decade of austerity to clean up his mess.
But the toxic legacy of Gordon Brown was more due to his time as Chancellor than that of his time as PM.
It is judging of them as PM not overall.
Indeed, it is hard to separate the two, which is why I rated Blair down in only 5th spot, he's down-rated due to Brown's legacy as Chancellor. Had it not been for Brown as Chancellor I'd have Blair up higher.
But Brown made matters even worse as PM. He completely botched the financial crisis by bailing out the failed banks, rather than allowing them to go bust and protecting guaranteed creditors instead like Iceland did.
That added much more debt than was necessary to an already bad problem and completely warped the market by suggesting that firms were too big to fail and making moral hazard a major problem.
Don't forget Brown is a war criminal who should be in the dock at the Hague alongside Blair.
As for Cameron, in his farewell speech to the Commons he focused on the introduction of gay marriage as a major achievement of his seven years in office. He only looks good compared with the four incompetents who succeeded him. And insofar as he was on the right side of the argument about EU membership.
Anyone who suggests either Blair or Brown is a war criminal is outing themselves as ridiculous.
And yes, Cameron deserves massive praise for introduction of equal marriage rights. 👍
He said it was the achievement he was most proud of. And I'll resist the obvious comment of 'from a short list' because it was an achievement and he's right to feel that way.
Particularly against the majority of his MPs; nowadays the PM is running scared of a minority of his.
'Dave' masked it for a while but the Tory Party seem to be uncomfortable with the modern world again. Not sure about Sunak at all. I find it hard to get a read on what he's all about. When he took over I was a bit worried he might be very good but no, he decidedly isn't. Phew.
Yes, but sorry to break it to you, but podgy Kier will be worse. Unlike Sunak, he knows fuck all about business and he has failed (unlike Blair) to make up for that massive deficit by surrounding himself with people that do. I hope I am wrong, but I expect to see the economy improve a little on the optimism of a change of government but then for it to tank under the mismanagement of people that have even less understanding of how an economy and business works that Peppa Pig Boy and Lizzy Lightweight combined.
In that case, let me put you out of your misery: you are wrong.
The Shadow Chancellor worked as an economist for the Bank of England, the UK embassy in Washington DC and Halifax Bank of Scotland before entering the Commons. She also chaired the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee from 2017 to 2020. These are not the hallmarks of a wide-eyed ingenue that “knows fuck all about business”, are they?
Wind your bloody neck in, for Pete’s sake.
Obviously touched a nerve. As this is only your 51st post, and you clearly find it difficult to look at your own political idols with anything less than rose tinted specs I will be polite, but feel obliged to point out that it seems that it might be your neck that may be getting overdistended. And by the way, Pete really doesn't mind when I last asked him.
Certainly compared to the average Labour politician she has more credentials here than most of her colleagues, and like Starmer, she is a huge improvement on her predecessors. Just to educate your good self though, economist does not equal business person. As I am guessing you might be a bit of an enthusiastic uncritical Labour supporter I am sure that is a revelation to you, as you probably assume they are the same. They are not.
Starmer needs to do a lot more work with the business community. He still has time.
Sunak's "business" career involved working as an analyst at Goldman Sachs, and later for an array of hedge funds. Now colour me skeptical but none of those enterprises involved chasing accounts receivable, juggling cashflow and harassing customers to make that order. That's my experience of a background in "business". Sunak's most informative business education was minding the chemist's shop for his mum.
If Starmer is not already engaging with business interest groups he has no desire to become PM.
Your criticism is valid, but it is still significantly greater than Sir Kier "when I was Director of Public Prosecutions" Starmer though n'est pas? And significantly greater than anyone on the Labour front bench unless I have missed something. Our economy requires people who don't just understand business, but understand what makes it tick. It is one of the worst aspects of our polarised system. We are about to replace one bunch who have no idea hwe a whole demographic works with another lot who are just as bad in a different direction. Maybe the LibDems are the compromise solution? (kidding)
Tories are the party of "fuck business".
Nope, Johnson, an ex-leader stated this, and though, as you know, I am no apologist for the fat incompetent twat, it was taken out of context. Many people in Labour genuinely believe it, and they will do everything they can to achieve it..
I had a senior role in an international British Chamber of Commerce all through the Brexit process and I can honestly say that the opinions of business were not merely ignored, but actively silenced by Conservative ministers, to the point that the Umbrella organisation of British Chambers in Europe was forcibly merged into a "global" group, without a European aspect.
I met with UK ministers on numerous occasions and in general the serious issues that we raised, and which have proven to be even worse than we predicted, were either ignored, minimized or derided.
So I have no doubt that the Conservatives have been incredibly bad for UK PLC, to the point that I actively welcome their total removal from office. In other words "F%ck the Conservatives".
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
What he did was uniquely catastrophic. Well apart from all Labour government's running out of money, that's not unique.
Can you name any other government that oversaw house prices going from a 3x income multiple to a 7x income multiple in a few years?
Can you name any other government that saw a budget surplus turned into a budget deficit of 3% in a few years before rather than after the next recession hits?
The Blair and Brown governments didn't get everything right but despite facing the worst global financial crisis since WW2 they presided over lower and more stable inflation than we've seen before or since, combined with much lower unemployment than under Thatcher and Major and stronger economic growth than under the current Tory administration. Combine with real improvements in public services, real progress on poverty reduction and a historic peace deal in Northern Ireland and you can see why most fair minded observers would view it as a relatively successful period for the UK.
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
What he did was uniquely catastrophic. Well apart from all Labour government's running out of money, that's not unique.
Can you name any other government that oversaw house prices going from a 3x income multiple to a 7x income multiple in a few years?
Can you name any other government that saw a budget surplus turned into a budget deficit of 3% in a few years before rather than after the next recession hits?
The Blair and Brown governments didn't get everything right but despite facing the worst global financial crisis since WW2 they presided over lower and more stable inflation than we've seen before or since, combined with much lower unemployment than under Thatcher and Major and stronger economic growth than under the current Tory administration. Combine with real improvements in public services, real progress on poverty reduction and a historic peace deal in Northern Ireland and you can see why most fair minded observers would view it as a relatively successful period for the UK.
I may have it wrong, but wasn’t the GFC in 2008, so not even Blair’s watch, and just two years of Brown left? The impacts of 2008 have rippled down the years. It’s a decent argument to have around the Tory choices in 2010, but IIRC Labour planned something very similar.
That interview with Mr Sunak yesterday was toe-curling. How can anyone think he would get through an intensive General Election campaign? Who is advising him?
The irony of Mr Seely going on TV to defend the line and being caught lieing about what he himself said on the same programme a week before is remarkable.
So who comes out of this looking good? Penny Mordaunt - a woman who was rejected for leader due to 'culture war' issues. My oh my. With friends like the culture warriors what political party needs enemies!
Meanwhile, outside the Westminster/PB bubble, an update from my local association:
Disappointment that our MP voted with Labour. Donors and activists angry and deflated. Calls for Sunak to be replaced.
Your continued reminder that whilst Sunak is popular here, and 'supported' by people who wouldn't dream of voting for him, the only time we've had a proper, working majority for the Tory party since PB began is when Boris Johnson went to the country in 2019.
Yougov polling was clear yesterday: 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris.
That is how unpopular Sunak is....
The Tory party have a problem with their members, just as the Labour party had under Corbyn. They are cuckoos in the nest.
Starmer was able to kick them out or at least neutralise them. Which leader of the Conservatives can do the same? Sunak seems too weak to do it. My money is on Mordaunt. But will the current Tory members allow her to be leader to cleanse them?
LOL. Given the members select the MPs, I suspect there is more chance of the PCP changing than the membership.
Those who gave Labour a big victory yesterday will be facing angry executives soon. There will almost certainly be some MPs looking for jobs elsewhere I should imagine.
The committee was majority Tory, led by brexiteer Sir Bernard Jenkin. & I'm fairly sure the line (Which is true) is that the average person doesn't really care about this, so quite how it's a 'big victory for Labour' I'm not sure. Was the Ferrier suspension a 'big victory' for the union ?
Voting with the opposition doesn't go down well in Tory associations, generally...
It was seen as vindictive by many Tory members.
But this is all besides the point.
Polling shows that Tory 2019 voters prefer Johnson to Sunak. In the LEs we did worse than CCHQ's expectation management.
They both shows to me how unelectable he is.
No Tory is electable right now.
The only possible path to redemption is for Sunak to renounce everything that has happened these years past - or be replaced by someone like Mordaunt more able to to the same - and then be seen to hug as many huskies as possible hoping voters will forget the shitshow we’ve all been subjected to since 2015. And hoping that Starmer’s ‘boring accountant’ impression doesn’t cut the mustard with voters who are seriously worried in serious times.
It’s a long shot, but nevertheless the only game in town.
One of Sunak’s significant handicaps is that he probably does believe in Brexit, despite most of his so-called friends thinking that he doesn’t.
Because the country has become hooked on handouts
That will pass when a Labour govt crashes the economy again.
Hopefully this eventually means we get rid of shite columnists like Peter Hitchens and Sean Thomas.
Germany’s Bild tabloid, the biggest-selling newspaper in Europe, is to replace a range of editorial jobs with artificial intelligence as part of a €100m costcutting programme expected to lead to hundreds of redundancies.
The newspaper would “unfortunately be parting ways with colleagues who have tasks that in the digital world are performed by AI and/or automated processes”, its owner, Europe’s largest media publisher, Axel Springer SE, said in an email to staff.
It said the roles of “editors, print production staff, subeditors, proofreaders and photo editors will no longer exist as they do today”, according to the email, seen by the rival Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper (FAZ).
Thatcher Blair Major Cameron May Brown Sunak Johnson Truss
You are very kind to Cameron, who I think is the PM whose stock has fallen the most since leaving office.
My list would be
Blair (despite Iraq) Thatcher Major Brown May Sunak Cameron Johnson Truss
Fun game.
My list would be.
Thatcher Cameron Major Johnson Blair Sunak May Truss Brown
And yes, I wanted Johnson out before he left and would not want him back, but I'd say the same to everyone I ranked below him too.
Truss above Brown for what reason? Colour of rosette?
No, not colour of rosette, I put Blair ahead of Sunak, May and Truss.
Truss ahead of Brown as she was removed before she did too much damage. She was bad, I called for her to resign before she did, but she was quickly ousted before much worse happened.
Her Premiership was like stepping on a piece of Lego. Short and painful but quickly over.
The legacy of Gordon Brown was far more toxic and far more long-lasting. It needed a decade of austerity to clean up his mess.
But the toxic legacy of Gordon Brown was more due to his time as Chancellor than that of his time as PM.
It is judging of them as PM not overall.
Indeed, it is hard to separate the two, which is why I rated Blair down in only 5th spot, he's down-rated due to Brown's legacy as Chancellor. Had it not been for Brown as Chancellor I'd have Blair up higher.
But Brown made matters even worse as PM. He completely botched the financial crisis by bailing out the failed banks, rather than allowing them to go bust and protecting guaranteed creditors instead like Iceland did.
That added much more debt than was necessary to an already bad problem and completely warped the market by suggesting that firms were too big to fail and making moral hazard a major problem.
Don't forget Brown is a war criminal who should be in the dock at the Hague alongside Blair.
As for Cameron, in his farewell speech to the Commons he focused on the introduction of gay marriage as a major achievement of his seven years in office. He only looks good compared with the four incompetents who succeeded him. And insofar as he was on the right side of the argument about EU membership.
Anyone who suggests either Blair or Brown is a war criminal is outing themselves as ridiculous.
And yes, Cameron deserves massive praise for introduction of equal marriage rights. 👍
He said it was the achievement he was most proud of. And I'll resist the obvious comment of 'from a short list' because it was an achievement and he's right to feel that way.
Particularly against the majority of his MPs; nowadays the PM is running scared of a minority of his.
'Dave' masked it for a while but the Tory Party seem to be uncomfortable with the modern world again. Not sure about Sunak at all. I find it hard to get a read on what he's all about. When he took over I was a bit worried he might be very good but no, he decidedly isn't. Phew.
Yes, but sorry to break it to you, but podgy Kier will be worse. Unlike Sunak, he knows fuck all about business and he has failed (unlike Blair) to make up for that massive deficit by surrounding himself with people that do. I hope I am wrong, but I expect to see the economy improve a little on the optimism of a change of government but then for it to tank under the mismanagement of people that have even less understanding of how an economy and business works that Peppa Pig Boy and Lizzy Lightweight combined.
In that case, let me put you out of your misery: you are wrong.
The Shadow Chancellor worked as an economist for the Bank of England, the UK embassy in Washington DC and Halifax Bank of Scotland before entering the Commons. She also chaired the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee from 2017 to 2020. These are not the hallmarks of a wide-eyed ingenue that “knows fuck all about business”, are they?
Wind your bloody neck in, for Pete’s sake.
Obviously touched a nerve. As this is only your 51st post, and you clearly find it difficult to look at your own political idols with anything less than rose tinted specs I will be polite, but feel obliged to point out that it seems that it might be your neck that may be getting overdistended. And by the way, Pete really doesn't mind when I last asked him.
Certainly compared to the average Labour politician she has more credentials here than most of her colleagues, and like Starmer, she is a huge improvement on her predecessors. Just to educate your good self though, economist does not equal business person. As I am guessing you might be a bit of an enthusiastic uncritical Labour supporter I am sure that is a revelation to you, as you probably assume they are the same. They are not.
Starmer needs to do a lot more work with the business community. He still has time.
Sunak's "business" career involved working as an analyst at Goldman Sachs, and later for an array of hedge funds. Now colour me skeptical but none of those enterprises involved chasing accounts receivable, juggling cashflow and harassing customers to make that order. That's my experience of a background in "business". Sunak's most informative business education was minding the chemist's shop for his mum.
If Starmer is not already engaging with business interest groups he has no desire to become PM.
Your criticism is valid, but it is still significantly greater than Sir Kier "when I was Director of Public Prosecutions" Starmer though n'est pas? And significantly greater than anyone on the Labour front bench unless I have missed something. Our economy requires people who don't just understand business, but understand what makes it tick. It is one of the worst aspects of our polarised system. We are about to replace one bunch who have no idea hwe a whole demographic works with another lot who are just as bad in a different direction. Maybe the LibDems are the compromise solution? (kidding)
Tories are the party of "fuck business".
Nope, Johnson, an ex-leader stated this, and though, as you know, I am no apologist for the fat incompetent twat, it was taken out of context. Many people in Labour genuinely believe it, and they will do everything they can to achieve it..
I had a senior role in an international British Chamber of Commerce all through the Brexit process and I can honestly say that the opinions of business were not merely ignored, but actively silenced by Conservative ministers, to the point that the Umbrella organisation of British Chambers in Europe was forcibly merged into a "global" group, without a European aspect.
I met with UK ministers on numerous occasions and in general the serious issues that we raised, and which have proven to be even worse than we predicted, were either ignored, minimized or derided.
So I have no doubt that the Conservatives have been incredibly bad for UK PLC, to the point that I actively welcome their total removal from office. In other words "F%ck the Conservatives".
Did you lobby for anything other than continuing full alignment with the single market?
That interview with Mr Sunak yesterday was toe-curling. How can anyone think he would get through an intensive General Election campaign? Who is advising him?
The irony of Mr Seely going on TV to defend the line and being caught lieing about what he himself said on the same programme a week before is remarkable.
So who comes out of this looking good? Penny Mordaunt - a woman who was rejected for leader due to 'culture war' issues. My oh my. With friends like the culture warriors what political party needs enemies!
Meanwhile, outside the Westminster/PB bubble, an update from my local association:
Disappointment that our MP voted with Labour. Donors and activists angry and deflated. Calls for Sunak to be replaced.
Your continued reminder that whilst Sunak is popular here, and 'supported' by people who wouldn't dream of voting for him, the only time we've had a proper, working majority for the Tory party since PB began is when Boris Johnson went to the country in 2019.
Yougov polling was clear yesterday: 2019 Tory voters prefer Boris.
That is how unpopular Sunak is....
The Tory party have a problem with their members, just as the Labour party had under Corbyn. They are cuckoos in the nest.
Starmer was able to kick them out or at least neutralise them. Which leader of the Conservatives can do the same? Sunak seems too weak to do it. My money is on Mordaunt. But will the current Tory members allow her to be leader to cleanse them?
LOL. Given the members select the MPs, I suspect there is more chance of the PCP changing than the membership.
Those who gave Labour a big victory yesterday will be facing angry executives soon. There will almost certainly be some MPs looking for jobs elsewhere I should imagine.
The committee was majority Tory, led by brexiteer Sir Bernard Jenkin. & I'm fairly sure the line (Which is true) is that the average person doesn't really care about this, so quite how it's a 'big victory for Labour' I'm not sure. Was the Ferrier suspension a 'big victory' for the union ?
Voting with the opposition doesn't go down well in Tory associations, generally...
It was seen as vindictive by many Tory members.
But this is all besides the point.
Polling shows that Tory 2019 voters prefer Johnson to Sunak. In the LEs we did worse than CCHQ's expectation management.
They both shows to me how unelectable he is.
No Tory is electable right now.
The only possible path to redemption is for Sunak to renounce everything that has happened these years past - or be replaced by someone like Mordaunt more able to to the same - and then be seen to hug as many huskies as possible hoping voters will forget the shitshow we’ve all been subjected to since 2015. And hoping that Starmer’s ‘boring accountant’ impression doesn’t cut the mustard with voters who are seriously worried in serious times.
It’s a long shot, but nevertheless the only game in town.
One of Sunak’s significant handicaps is that he probably does believe in Brexit, despite most of his so-called friends thinking that he doesn’t.
Because the country has become hooked on handouts
That will pass when a Labour govt crashes the economy again.
Take a more mature approach to the EU and they could very easily do better
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
What he did was uniquely catastrophic. Well apart from all Labour government's running out of money, that's not unique.
Can you name any other government that oversaw house prices going from a 3x income multiple to a 7x income multiple in a few years?
Can you name any other government that saw a budget surplus turned into a budget deficit of 3% in a few years before rather than after the next recession hits?
The Blair and Brown governments didn't get everything right but despite facing the worst global financial crisis since WW2 they presided over lower and more stable inflation than we've seen before or since, combined with much lower unemployment than under Thatcher and Major and stronger economic growth than under the current Tory administration. Combine with real improvements in public services, real progress on poverty reduction and a historic peace deal in Northern Ireland and you can see why most fair minded observers would view it as a relatively successful period for the UK.
I may have it wrong, but wasn’t the GFC in 2008, so not even Blair’s watch, and just two years of Brown left? The impacts of 2008 have rippled down the years. It’s a decent argument to have around the Tory choices in 2010, but IIRC Labour planned something very similar.
I mentioned it simply because without it the UK's economic performance in terms of growth, unemployment and inflation would have looked even better under the last Labour government - remarkably good in fact, rather than just pretty good. It was a largely successful government, which is more than one can say for the shambolic succession of horror shows that have followed.
Hopefully this eventually means we get rid of shite columnists like Peter Hitchens and Sean Thomas.
Germany’s Bild tabloid, the biggest-selling newspaper in Europe, is to replace a range of editorial jobs with artificial intelligence as part of a €100m costcutting programme expected to lead to hundreds of redundancies.
The newspaper would “unfortunately be parting ways with colleagues who have tasks that in the digital world are performed by AI and/or automated processes”, its owner, Europe’s largest media publisher, Axel Springer SE, said in an email to staff.
It said the roles of “editors, print production staff, subeditors, proofreaders and photo editors will no longer exist as they do today”, according to the email, seen by the rival Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper (FAZ).
Thatcher Blair Major Cameron May Brown Sunak Johnson Truss
You are very kind to Cameron, who I think is the PM whose stock has fallen the most since leaving office.
My list would be
Blair (despite Iraq) Thatcher Major Brown May Sunak Cameron Johnson Truss
Fun game.
My list would be.
Thatcher Cameron Major Johnson Blair Sunak May Truss Brown
And yes, I wanted Johnson out before he left and would not want him back, but I'd say the same to everyone I ranked below him too.
Truss above Brown for what reason? Colour of rosette?
No, not colour of rosette, I put Blair ahead of Sunak, May and Truss.
Truss ahead of Brown as she was removed before she did too much damage. She was bad, I called for her to resign before she did, but she was quickly ousted before much worse happened.
Her Premiership was like stepping on a piece of Lego. Short and painful but quickly over.
The legacy of Gordon Brown was far more toxic and far more long-lasting. It needed a decade of austerity to clean up his mess.
But the toxic legacy of Gordon Brown was more due to his time as Chancellor than that of his time as PM.
It is judging of them as PM not overall.
Indeed, it is hard to separate the two, which is why I rated Blair down in only 5th spot, he's down-rated due to Brown's legacy as Chancellor. Had it not been for Brown as Chancellor I'd have Blair up higher.
But Brown made matters even worse as PM. He completely botched the financial crisis by bailing out the failed banks, rather than allowing them to go bust and protecting guaranteed creditors instead like Iceland did.
That added much more debt than was necessary to an already bad problem and completely warped the market by suggesting that firms were too big to fail and making moral hazard a major problem.
Don't forget Brown is a war criminal who should be in the dock at the Hague alongside Blair.
As for Cameron, in his farewell speech to the Commons he focused on the introduction of gay marriage as a major achievement of his seven years in office. He only looks good compared with the four incompetents who succeeded him. And insofar as he was on the right side of the argument about EU membership.
Anyone who suggests either Blair or Brown is a war criminal is outing themselves as ridiculous.
And yes, Cameron deserves massive praise for introduction of equal marriage rights. 👍
He said it was the achievement he was most proud of. And I'll resist the obvious comment of 'from a short list' because it was an achievement and he's right to feel that way.
Particularly against the majority of his MPs; nowadays the PM is running scared of a minority of his.
'Dave' masked it for a while but the Tory Party seem to be uncomfortable with the modern world again. Not sure about Sunak at all. I find it hard to get a read on what he's all about. When he took over I was a bit worried he might be very good but no, he decidedly isn't. Phew.
Yes, but sorry to break it to you, but podgy Kier will be worse. Unlike Sunak, he knows fuck all about business and he has failed (unlike Blair) to make up for that massive deficit by surrounding himself with people that do. I hope I am wrong, but I expect to see the economy improve a little on the optimism of a change of government but then for it to tank under the mismanagement of people that have even less understanding of how an economy and business works that Peppa Pig Boy and Lizzy Lightweight combined.
In that case, let me put you out of your misery: you are wrong.
The Shadow Chancellor worked as an economist for the Bank of England, the UK embassy in Washington DC and Halifax Bank of Scotland before entering the Commons. She also chaired the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee from 2017 to 2020. These are not the hallmarks of a wide-eyed ingenue that “knows fuck all about business”, are they?
Wind your bloody neck in, for Pete’s sake.
Obviously touched a nerve. As this is only your 51st post, and you clearly find it difficult to look at your own political idols with anything less than rose tinted specs I will be polite, but feel obliged to point out that it seems that it might be your neck that may be getting overdistended. And by the way, Pete really doesn't mind when I last asked him.
Certainly compared to the average Labour politician she has more credentials here than most of her colleagues, and like Starmer, she is a huge improvement on her predecessors. Just to educate your good self though, economist does not equal business person. As I am guessing you might be a bit of an enthusiastic uncritical Labour supporter I am sure that is a revelation to you, as you probably assume they are the same. They are not.
Starmer needs to do a lot more work with the business community. He still has time.
Sunak's "business" career involved working as an analyst at Goldman Sachs, and later for an array of hedge funds. Now colour me skeptical but none of those enterprises involved chasing accounts receivable, juggling cashflow and harassing customers to make that order. That's my experience of a background in "business". Sunak's most informative business education was minding the chemist's shop for his mum.
If Starmer is not already engaging with business interest groups he has no desire to become PM.
Your criticism is valid, but it is still significantly greater than Sir Kier "when I was Director of Public Prosecutions" Starmer though n'est pas? And significantly greater than anyone on the Labour front bench unless I have missed something. Our economy requires people who don't just understand business, but understand what makes it tick. It is one of the worst aspects of our polarised system. We are about to replace one bunch who have no idea hwe a whole demographic works with another lot who are just as bad in a different direction. Maybe the LibDems are the compromise solution? (kidding)
Tories are the party of "fuck business".
Nope, Johnson, an ex-leader stated this, and though, as you know, I am no apologist for the fat incompetent twat, it was taken out of context. Many people in Labour genuinely believe it, and they will do everything they can to achieve it..
I had a senior role in an international British Chamber of Commerce all through the Brexit process and I can honestly say that the opinions of business were not merely ignored, but actively silenced by Conservative ministers, to the point that the Umbrella organisation of British Chambers in Europe was forcibly merged into a "global" group, without a European aspect.
I met with UK ministers on numerous occasions and in general the serious issues that we raised, and which have proven to be even worse than we predicted, were either ignored, minimized or derided.
So I have no doubt that the Conservatives have been incredibly bad for UK PLC, to the point that I actively welcome their total removal from office. In other words "F%ck the Conservatives".
As I said to Mortimer above.
We have reached the point where, however ineffectual or duplicitous Starmer’s Labour turns out to be, few currently believe that putting this bunch of dysfunctional Tories back in for another five years could possibly turn out any better.
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
What he did was uniquely catastrophic. Well apart from all Labour government's running out of money, that's not unique.
Can you name any other government that oversaw house prices going from a 3x income multiple to a 7x income multiple in a few years?
Can you name any other government that saw a budget surplus turned into a budget deficit of 3% in a few years before rather than after the next recession hits?
The Blair and Brown governments didn't get everything right but despite facing the worst global financial crisis since WW2 they presided over lower and more stable inflation than we've seen before or since, combined with much lower unemployment than under Thatcher and Major and stronger economic growth than under the current Tory administration. Combine with real improvements in public services, real progress on poverty reduction and a historic peace deal in Northern Ireland and you can see why most fair minded observers would view it as a relatively successful period for the UK.
I may have it wrong, but wasn’t the GFC in 2008, so not even Blair’s watch, and just two years of Brown left? The impacts of 2008 have rippled down the years. It’s a decent argument to have around the Tory choices in 2010, but IIRC Labour planned something very similar.
I mentioned it simply because without it the UK's economic performance in terms of growth, unemployment and inflation would have looked even better under the last Labour government - remarkably good in fact, rather than just pretty good. It was a largely successful government, which is more than one can say for the shambolic succession of horror shows that have followed.
And you don’t buy the argument that they inherited a booming economy at a time of good global conditions?
Hopefully this eventually means we get rid of shite columnists like Peter Hitchens and Sean Thomas.
Germany’s Bild tabloid, the biggest-selling newspaper in Europe, is to replace a range of editorial jobs with artificial intelligence as part of a €100m costcutting programme expected to lead to hundreds of redundancies.
The newspaper would “unfortunately be parting ways with colleagues who have tasks that in the digital world are performed by AI and/or automated processes”, its owner, Europe’s largest media publisher, Axel Springer SE, said in an email to staff.
It said the roles of “editors, print production staff, subeditors, proofreaders and photo editors will no longer exist as they do today”, according to the email, seen by the rival Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper (FAZ).
Thatcher Blair Major Cameron May Brown Sunak Johnson Truss
You are very kind to Cameron, who I think is the PM whose stock has fallen the most since leaving office.
My list would be
Blair (despite Iraq) Thatcher Major Brown May Sunak Cameron Johnson Truss
Fun game.
My list would be.
Thatcher Cameron Major Johnson Blair Sunak May Truss Brown
And yes, I wanted Johnson out before he left and would not want him back, but I'd say the same to everyone I ranked below him too.
Truss above Brown for what reason? Colour of rosette?
No, not colour of rosette, I put Blair ahead of Sunak, May and Truss.
Truss ahead of Brown as she was removed before she did too much damage. She was bad, I called for her to resign before she did, but she was quickly ousted before much worse happened.
Her Premiership was like stepping on a piece of Lego. Short and painful but quickly over.
The legacy of Gordon Brown was far more toxic and far more long-lasting. It needed a decade of austerity to clean up his mess.
But the toxic legacy of Gordon Brown was more due to his time as Chancellor than that of his time as PM.
It is judging of them as PM not overall.
Indeed, it is hard to separate the two, which is why I rated Blair down in only 5th spot, he's down-rated due to Brown's legacy as Chancellor. Had it not been for Brown as Chancellor I'd have Blair up higher.
But Brown made matters even worse as PM. He completely botched the financial crisis by bailing out the failed banks, rather than allowing them to go bust and protecting guaranteed creditors instead like Iceland did.
That added much more debt than was necessary to an already bad problem and completely warped the market by suggesting that firms were too big to fail and making moral hazard a major problem.
Don't forget Brown is a war criminal who should be in the dock at the Hague alongside Blair.
As for Cameron, in his farewell speech to the Commons he focused on the introduction of gay marriage as a major achievement of his seven years in office. He only looks good compared with the four incompetents who succeeded him. And insofar as he was on the right side of the argument about EU membership.
Anyone who suggests either Blair or Brown is a war criminal is outing themselves as ridiculous.
And yes, Cameron deserves massive praise for introduction of equal marriage rights. 👍
He said it was the achievement he was most proud of. And I'll resist the obvious comment of 'from a short list' because it was an achievement and he's right to feel that way.
Particularly against the majority of his MPs; nowadays the PM is running scared of a minority of his.
'Dave' masked it for a while but the Tory Party seem to be uncomfortable with the modern world again. Not sure about Sunak at all. I find it hard to get a read on what he's all about. When he took over I was a bit worried he might be very good but no, he decidedly isn't. Phew.
Yes, but sorry to break it to you, but podgy Kier will be worse. Unlike Sunak, he knows fuck all about business and he has failed (unlike Blair) to make up for that massive deficit by surrounding himself with people that do. I hope I am wrong, but I expect to see the economy improve a little on the optimism of a change of government but then for it to tank under the mismanagement of people that have even less understanding of how an economy and business works that Peppa Pig Boy and Lizzy Lightweight combined.
In that case, let me put you out of your misery: you are wrong.
The Shadow Chancellor worked as an economist for the Bank of England, the UK embassy in Washington DC and Halifax Bank of Scotland before entering the Commons. She also chaired the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee from 2017 to 2020. These are not the hallmarks of a wide-eyed ingenue that “knows fuck all about business”, are they?
Wind your bloody neck in, for Pete’s sake.
Obviously touched a nerve. As this is only your 51st post, and you clearly find it difficult to look at your own political idols with anything less than rose tinted specs I will be polite, but feel obliged to point out that it seems that it might be your neck that may be getting overdistended. And by the way, Pete really doesn't mind when I last asked him.
Certainly compared to the average Labour politician she has more credentials here than most of her colleagues, and like Starmer, she is a huge improvement on her predecessors. Just to educate your good self though, economist does not equal business person. As I am guessing you might be a bit of an enthusiastic uncritical Labour supporter I am sure that is a revelation to you, as you probably assume they are the same. They are not.
Starmer needs to do a lot more work with the business community. He still has time.
I suspect the only nerve you’ve touched today is your pudendal nerve. And your assumptions about my political persuasions are as misguided as your assertions about the respective business and economic expertise within the governments of Sunak, Blair and Starmer.
You seem very angry. We do have a few angry people on here as it is an inclusive site. Try chilling out a bit though and it will make your posts seem more interesting and prevent people from thinking you are just a swiveleyed twat.
I'm not very angry, Nigel. I'm certainly chilled out enough to avoid referring to another poster as "just a swiveleyed twat", in any case, Nigel. But thanks for passing on the (presumably second-hand) advice on chilling out, making my posts more interesting and preventing people from thinking I'm "just a swiveleyed twat", Nigel. I'll make sure I pay it due regard, Nigel. You have a good day now, Nigel.
@Tomorrow'sMPs @tomorrowsmps · 40s 🔵 SOMERTON & FROME: I understand that James Hamblin, chief-of-staff to David Warburton, the MP who has just quit, has applied for the Conservative selection.
Hopefully this eventually means we get rid of shite columnists like Peter Hitchens and Sean Thomas.
Germany’s Bild tabloid, the biggest-selling newspaper in Europe, is to replace a range of editorial jobs with artificial intelligence as part of a €100m costcutting programme expected to lead to hundreds of redundancies.
The newspaper would “unfortunately be parting ways with colleagues who have tasks that in the digital world are performed by AI and/or automated processes”, its owner, Europe’s largest media publisher, Axel Springer SE, said in an email to staff.
It said the roles of “editors, print production staff, subeditors, proofreaders and photo editors will no longer exist as they do today”, according to the email, seen by the rival Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper (FAZ).
Thatcher Blair Major Cameron May Brown Sunak Johnson Truss
You are very kind to Cameron, who I think is the PM whose stock has fallen the most since leaving office.
My list would be
Blair (despite Iraq) Thatcher Major Brown May Sunak Cameron Johnson Truss
Fun game.
My list would be.
Thatcher Cameron Major Johnson Blair Sunak May Truss Brown
And yes, I wanted Johnson out before he left and would not want him back, but I'd say the same to everyone I ranked below him too.
Truss above Brown for what reason? Colour of rosette?
No, not colour of rosette, I put Blair ahead of Sunak, May and Truss.
Truss ahead of Brown as she was removed before she did too much damage. She was bad, I called for her to resign before she did, but she was quickly ousted before much worse happened.
Her Premiership was like stepping on a piece of Lego. Short and painful but quickly over.
The legacy of Gordon Brown was far more toxic and far more long-lasting. It needed a decade of austerity to clean up his mess.
But the toxic legacy of Gordon Brown was more due to his time as Chancellor than that of his time as PM.
It is judging of them as PM not overall.
Indeed, it is hard to separate the two, which is why I rated Blair down in only 5th spot, he's down-rated due to Brown's legacy as Chancellor. Had it not been for Brown as Chancellor I'd have Blair up higher.
But Brown made matters even worse as PM. He completely botched the financial crisis by bailing out the failed banks, rather than allowing them to go bust and protecting guaranteed creditors instead like Iceland did.
That added much more debt than was necessary to an already bad problem and completely warped the market by suggesting that firms were too big to fail and making moral hazard a major problem.
Don't forget Brown is a war criminal who should be in the dock at the Hague alongside Blair.
As for Cameron, in his farewell speech to the Commons he focused on the introduction of gay marriage as a major achievement of his seven years in office. He only looks good compared with the four incompetents who succeeded him. And insofar as he was on the right side of the argument about EU membership.
Anyone who suggests either Blair or Brown is a war criminal is outing themselves as ridiculous.
And yes, Cameron deserves massive praise for introduction of equal marriage rights. 👍
He said it was the achievement he was most proud of. And I'll resist the obvious comment of 'from a short list' because it was an achievement and he's right to feel that way.
Particularly against the majority of his MPs; nowadays the PM is running scared of a minority of his.
'Dave' masked it for a while but the Tory Party seem to be uncomfortable with the modern world again. Not sure about Sunak at all. I find it hard to get a read on what he's all about. When he took over I was a bit worried he might be very good but no, he decidedly isn't. Phew.
Yes, but sorry to break it to you, but podgy Kier will be worse. Unlike Sunak, he knows fuck all about business and he has failed (unlike Blair) to make up for that massive deficit by surrounding himself with people that do. I hope I am wrong, but I expect to see the economy improve a little on the optimism of a change of government but then for it to tank under the mismanagement of people that have even less understanding of how an economy and business works that Peppa Pig Boy and Lizzy Lightweight combined.
I'm not sure of the answer myself, but it is legitimate to challenge your post by asking who you think is serious and who you think is unserious in the Labour ranks or what, amongst the trickle of policy announcements, you regard as serious or unserious? Show your workings.
A good and fair question. My impression is that the curent Labour leadership is only interested in the public sector based on announcements made and questions put by LoTO. I would be delighted to be reassured, because we are almost certain to get a Labour government. Can I perhaps ask you a question or two? a) what policy announcements has Starmer made that demonstrate Labour's commitment to business and wealth creation in the private sector (as was done by Blair) and how many people on the Labour frontbench have had a substantial part of their career in the private, not public sector?
Tories have plenty of ministers with private sector experience. Hasn't led to much national wealth creation over the past decade that I can see.
Agree though that very few lab mps have business backgrounds, especially if you rule out the lawyers. Tbh many MPs have very little experience in anything other than politics.
'Tis why I don't buy the argument against second jobs. Being a backbencher is a part time job or how else can one also be a minister? All backbenchers should IMO be encouraged to have second jobs even if it is pushing trolleys in a Tesco car park.
I think most people are fine with genuine 2nd jobs, it's the lobbying jobs which are wrong. It ought to be possible to tell the difference in my opinion.
The ex-PBer @SeanT on "AI and the end of Writing":
"Putting on my pointy hat of pessimism, here’s how I think it will pan out. The machines will come for much academic work first – essays, PhDs, boring scholarly texts (unsurprisingly it can churn these out right now). Fanfic is instantly doomed, as are self-published novels. Next will be low-level journalism, copywriting, marketing, legalese, tech writing..."
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
What he did was uniquely catastrophic. Well apart from all Labour government's running out of money, that's not unique.
Can you name any other government that oversaw house prices going from a 3x income multiple to a 7x income multiple in a few years?
Can you name any other government that saw a budget surplus turned into a budget deficit of 3% in a few years before rather than after the next recession hits?
The Blair and Brown governments didn't get everything right but despite facing the worst global financial crisis since WW2 they presided over lower and more stable inflation than we've seen before or since, combined with much lower unemployment than under Thatcher and Major and stronger economic growth than under the current Tory administration. Combine with real improvements in public services, real progress on poverty reduction and a historic peace deal in Northern Ireland and you can see why most fair minded observers would view it as a relatively successful period for the UK.
"lower and more stable inflation" - unmitigated bullshit.
So housing going from £60k in 1997 to £177k in 2010 was "low and stable inflation".
Or do you mean low and stable inflation, if you exclude from inflation those costs that were going up?
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
What he did was uniquely catastrophic. Well apart from all Labour government's running out of money, that's not unique.
Can you name any other government that oversaw house prices going from a 3x income multiple to a 7x income multiple in a few years?
Can you name any other government that saw a budget surplus turned into a budget deficit of 3% in a few years before rather than after the next recession hits?
The Blair and Brown governments didn't get everything right but despite facing the worst global financial crisis since WW2 they presided over lower and more stable inflation than we've seen before or since, combined with much lower unemployment than under Thatcher and Major and stronger economic growth than under the current Tory administration. Combine with real improvements in public services, real progress on poverty reduction and a historic peace deal in Northern Ireland and you can see why most fair minded observers would view it as a relatively successful period for the UK.
"lower and more stable inflation" - unmitigated bullshit.
So housing going from £60k in 1997 to £177k in 2010 was "low and stable inflation".
Or do you mean low and stable inflation, if you exclude from inflation those costs that were going up?
I mean inflation as it is usually defined - inflation in goods and services, not asset prices.
Fuck me how do you block Dail Mail pop-ups and Notifications?
I accidentally pressed allow, and now nothing will get rid of them. Like Japanese knotweed
I don't know. Look round the site? Google it? Ask ChatGPT?
What I would do is close any Mail browser windows, delete all downloaded files in the browser cache, and (the important bit) delete any Mail-related cookies.
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
What he did was uniquely catastrophic. Well apart from all Labour government's running out of money, that's not unique.
Can you name any other government that oversaw house prices going from a 3x income multiple to a 7x income multiple in a few years?
Can you name any other government that saw a budget surplus turned into a budget deficit of 3% in a few years before rather than after the next recession hits?
The Blair and Brown governments didn't get everything right but despite facing the worst global financial crisis since WW2 they presided over lower and more stable inflation than we've seen before or since, combined with much lower unemployment than under Thatcher and Major and stronger economic growth than under the current Tory administration. Combine with real improvements in public services, real progress on poverty reduction and a historic peace deal in Northern Ireland and you can see why most fair minded observers would view it as a relatively successful period for the UK.
"lower and more stable inflation" - unmitigated bullshit.
So housing going from £60k in 1997 to £177k in 2010 was "low and stable inflation".
Or do you mean low and stable inflation, if you exclude from inflation those costs that were going up?
I mean inflation as it is usually defined - inflation in goods and services, not asset prices.
That definition is one of the reasons our economy has become so distorted.
In any case, I was always dubious about that inflation measure. I noticed the price of basic staples skyrocketing, particularly bread, even if China was making consumer goods much cheaper.
Looking increasingly likely AUS may not get there by 80 overs which could give ENG a chance with second new ball. If AUS have established batters then, then this won't help ENG but it could do if they are say 7 or 8 down with new batters.
Am I a dinosaur for preferring 'batsman' to 'batter'? Batter is a flour mixture.
I suppose you prefer 'bowlsman' and 'wicketkeepsman' too?
That interview with Mr Sunak yesterday was toe-curling. How can anyone think he would get through an intensive General Election campaign? Who is advising him?
The irony of Mr Seely going on TV to defend the line and being caught lieing about what he himself said on the same programme a week before is remarkable.
So who comes out of this looking good? Penny Mordaunt - a woman who was rejected for leader due to 'culture war' issues. My oh my. With friends like the culture warriors what political party needs enemies!
Is not one of the tells of a chronic liar, that they often find it difficult, to recall all the lies they've told?
Whereas recollecting the truth about what one said and did, is way easier?
Boris Johnson xMP xPM of course being THE poster poltroon for this phenomenon.
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
What he did was uniquely catastrophic. Well apart from all Labour government's running out of money, that's not unique.
Can you name any other government that oversaw house prices going from a 3x income multiple to a 7x income multiple in a few years?
Can you name any other government that saw a budget surplus turned into a budget deficit of 3% in a few years before rather than after the next recession hits?
The Blair and Brown governments didn't get everything right but despite facing the worst global financial crisis since WW2 they presided over lower and more stable inflation than we've seen before or since, combined with much lower unemployment than under Thatcher and Major and stronger economic growth than under the current Tory administration. Combine with real improvements in public services, real progress on poverty reduction and a historic peace deal in Northern Ireland and you can see why most fair minded observers would view it as a relatively successful period for the UK.
"lower and more stable inflation" - unmitigated bullshit.
So housing going from £60k in 1997 to £177k in 2010 was "low and stable inflation".
Or do you mean low and stable inflation, if you exclude from inflation those costs that were going up?
I mean inflation as it is usually defined - inflation in goods and services, not asset prices.
Inflation in goods is just one type of inflation. Inflation in housing costs are another - and a pretty critical one for people who like to not be homeless.
Unfortunately Gordon Brown decided to set only one type of inflation before all others in the Bank of England's remit, rather than a balanced overview, which resulted in unprecedentedly high runaway inflation in what wasn't getting monitored and controlled inflation on what we could import from China.
A balanced policy would have looked at all types of inflation, not just one.
Looking increasingly likely AUS may not get there by 80 overs which could give ENG a chance with second new ball. If AUS have established batters then, then this won't help ENG but it could do if they are say 7 or 8 down with new batters.
Am I a dinosaur for preferring 'batsman' to 'batter'? Batter is a flour mixture.
I suppose you prefer 'bowlsman' and 'wicketkeepsman' too?
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
What he did was uniquely catastrophic. Well apart from all Labour government's running out of money, that's not unique.
Can you name any other government that oversaw house prices going from a 3x income multiple to a 7x income multiple in a few years?
Can you name any other government that saw a budget surplus turned into a budget deficit of 3% in a few years before rather than after the next recession hits?
The Blair and Brown governments didn't get everything right but despite facing the worst global financial crisis since WW2 they presided over lower and more stable inflation than we've seen before or since, combined with much lower unemployment than under Thatcher and Major and stronger economic growth than under the current Tory administration. Combine with real improvements in public services, real progress on poverty reduction and a historic peace deal in Northern Ireland and you can see why most fair minded observers would view it as a relatively successful period for the UK.
"lower and more stable inflation" - unmitigated bullshit.
So housing going from £60k in 1997 to £177k in 2010 was "low and stable inflation".
Or do you mean low and stable inflation, if you exclude from inflation those costs that were going up?
I mean inflation as it is usually defined - inflation in goods and services, not asset prices.
Forcing consumer inflation to be positive was one of the main reasons the benefits of globalisation were so unevently distributed.
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
He started the ball rolling on screwing up our private pension system
He also believed his own BS and massively inflated a structural deficit based on the mirage of endless taxes from the City
Looking increasingly likely AUS may not get there by 80 overs which could give ENG a chance with second new ball. If AUS have established batters then, then this won't help ENG but it could do if they are say 7 or 8 down with new batters.
Am I a dinosaur for preferring 'batsman' to 'batter'? Batter is a flour mixture.
I suppose you prefer 'bowlsman' and 'wicketkeepsman' too?
The bat is the tool, so that should maybe be ballman (not great) or gloveman (which is in use).
To stop notification on a Mac: On your Mac, choose Apple menu > System Settings, then click Notifications in the sidebar. (You may need to scroll down.) Click an app or website on the right, then turn off Allow notifications. You won’t receive notifications for it until you turn on “Allow notifications” again.
@alexwickham EXCLUSIVE: Rishi Sunak is facing a Cabinet row over plans to pay the EU for access to its Frontex border agency — which would be limited by Britain’s post-Brexit "third country" status
Thatcher Blair Major Cameron May Brown Sunak Johnson Truss
You are very kind to Cameron, who I think is the PM whose stock has fallen the most since leaving office.
My list would be
Blair (despite Iraq) Thatcher Major Brown May Sunak Cameron Johnson Truss
Fun game.
My list would be.
Thatcher Cameron Major Johnson Blair Sunak May Truss Brown
And yes, I wanted Johnson out before he left and would not want him back, but I'd say the same to everyone I ranked below him too.
Truss above Brown for what reason? Colour of rosette?
No, not colour of rosette, I put Blair ahead of Sunak, May and Truss.
Truss ahead of Brown as she was removed before she did too much damage. She was bad, I called for her to resign before she did, but she was quickly ousted before much worse happened.
Her Premiership was like stepping on a piece of Lego. Short and painful but quickly over.
The legacy of Gordon Brown was far more toxic and far more long-lasting. It needed a decade of austerity to clean up his mess.
But the toxic legacy of Gordon Brown was more due to his time as Chancellor than that of his time as PM.
It is judging of them as PM not overall.
Indeed, it is hard to separate the two, which is why I rated Blair down in only 5th spot, he's down-rated due to Brown's legacy as Chancellor. Had it not been for Brown as Chancellor I'd have Blair up higher.
But Brown made matters even worse as PM. He completely botched the financial crisis by bailing out the failed banks, rather than allowing them to go bust and protecting guaranteed creditors instead like Iceland did.
That added much more debt than was necessary to an already bad problem and completely warped the market by suggesting that firms were too big to fail and making moral hazard a major problem.
Don't forget Brown is a war criminal who should be in the dock at the Hague alongside Blair.
As for Cameron, in his farewell speech to the Commons he focused on the introduction of gay marriage as a major achievement of his seven years in office. He only looks good compared with the four incompetents who succeeded him. And insofar as he was on the right side of the argument about EU membership.
Anyone who suggests either Blair or Brown is a war criminal is outing themselves as ridiculous.
And yes, Cameron deserves massive praise for introduction of equal marriage rights. 👍
He said it was the achievement he was most proud of. And I'll resist the obvious comment of 'from a short list' because it was an achievement and he's right to feel that way.
Particularly against the majority of his MPs; nowadays the PM is running scared of a minority of his.
'Dave' masked it for a while but the Tory Party seem to be uncomfortable with the modern world again. Not sure about Sunak at all. I find it hard to get a read on what he's all about. When he took over I was a bit worried he might be very good but no, he decidedly isn't. Phew.
Yes, but sorry to break it to you, but podgy Kier will be worse. Unlike Sunak, he knows fuck all about business and he has failed (unlike Blair) to make up for that massive deficit by surrounding himself with people that do. I hope I am wrong, but I expect to see the economy improve a little on the optimism of a change of government but then for it to tank under the mismanagement of people that have even less understanding of how an economy and business works that Peppa Pig Boy and Lizzy Lightweight combined.
In that case, let me put you out of your misery: you are wrong.
The Shadow Chancellor worked as an economist for the Bank of England, the UK embassy in Washington DC and Halifax Bank of Scotland before entering the Commons. She also chaired the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee from 2017 to 2020. These are not the hallmarks of a wide-eyed ingenue that “knows fuck all about business”, are they?
Wind your bloody neck in, for Pete’s sake.
Obviously touched a nerve. As this is only your 51st post, and you clearly find it difficult to look at your own political idols with anything less than rose tinted specs I will be polite, but feel obliged to point out that it seems that it might be your neck that may be getting overdistended. And by the way, Pete really doesn't mind when I last asked him.
Certainly compared to the average Labour politician she has more credentials here than most of her colleagues, and like Starmer, she is a huge improvement on her predecessors. Just to educate your good self though, economist does not equal business person. As I am guessing you might be a bit of an enthusiastic uncritical Labour supporter I am sure that is a revelation to you, as you probably assume they are the same. They are not.
Starmer needs to do a lot more work with the business community. He still has time.
Sunak's "business" career involved working as an analyst at Goldman Sachs, and later for an array of hedge funds. Now colour me skeptical but none of those enterprises involved chasing accounts receivable, juggling cashflow and harassing customers to make that order. That's my experience of a background in "business". Sunak's most informative business education was minding the chemist's shop for his mum.
If Starmer is not already engaging with business interest groups he has no desire to become PM.
Your criticism is valid, but it is still significantly greater than Sir Kier "when I was Director of Public Prosecutions" Starmer though n'est pas? And significantly greater than anyone on the Labour front bench unless I have missed something. Our economy requires people who don't just understand business, but understand what makes it tick. It is one of the worst aspects of our polarised system. We are about to replace one bunch who have no idea hwe a whole demographic works with another lot who are just as bad in a different direction. Maybe the LibDems are the compromise solution? (kidding)
Tories are the party of "fuck business".
Nah that’s the Johnson party. Nothing to we the modern inclusive Tory party under Sunak.
To stop notification on a Mac: On your Mac, choose Apple menu > System Settings, then click Notifications in the sidebar. (You may need to scroll down.) Click an app or website on the right, then turn off Allow notifications. You won’t receive notifications for it until you turn on “Allow notifications” again.
No, this is notifications from Safari. I think Leon is talking about notifications from websites within safari.
Thatcher Blair Major Cameron May Brown Sunak Johnson Truss
You are very kind to Cameron, who I think is the PM whose stock has fallen the most since leaving office.
My list would be
Blair (despite Iraq) Thatcher Major Brown May Sunak Cameron Johnson Truss
Fun game.
My list would be.
Thatcher Cameron Major Johnson Blair Sunak May Truss Brown
And yes, I wanted Johnson out before he left and would not want him back, but I'd say the same to everyone I ranked below him too.
Truss above Brown for what reason? Colour of rosette?
No, not colour of rosette, I put Blair ahead of Sunak, May and Truss.
Truss ahead of Brown as she was removed before she did too much damage. She was bad, I called for her to resign before she did, but she was quickly ousted before much worse happened.
Her Premiership was like stepping on a piece of Lego. Short and painful but quickly over.
The legacy of Gordon Brown was far more toxic and far more long-lasting. It needed a decade of austerity to clean up his mess.
But the toxic legacy of Gordon Brown was more due to his time as Chancellor than that of his time as PM.
It is judging of them as PM not overall.
Indeed, it is hard to separate the two, which is why I rated Blair down in only 5th spot, he's down-rated due to Brown's legacy as Chancellor. Had it not been for Brown as Chancellor I'd have Blair up higher.
But Brown made matters even worse as PM. He completely botched the financial crisis by bailing out the failed banks, rather than allowing them to go bust and protecting guaranteed creditors instead like Iceland did.
That added much more debt than was necessary to an already bad problem and completely warped the market by suggesting that firms were too big to fail and making moral hazard a major problem.
Don't forget Brown is a war criminal who should be in the dock at the Hague alongside Blair.
As for Cameron, in his farewell speech to the Commons he focused on the introduction of gay marriage as a major achievement of his seven years in office. He only looks good compared with the four incompetents who succeeded him. And insofar as he was on the right side of the argument about EU membership.
Anyone who suggests either Blair or Brown is a war criminal is outing themselves as ridiculous.
And yes, Cameron deserves massive praise for introduction of equal marriage rights. 👍
He said it was the achievement he was most proud of. And I'll resist the obvious comment of 'from a short list' because it was an achievement and he's right to feel that way.
Particularly against the majority of his MPs; nowadays the PM is running scared of a minority of his.
'Dave' masked it for a while but the Tory Party seem to be uncomfortable with the modern world again. Not sure about Sunak at all. I find it hard to get a read on what he's all about. When he took over I was a bit worried he might be very good but no, he decidedly isn't. Phew.
Yes, but sorry to break it to you, but podgy Kier will be worse. Unlike Sunak, he knows fuck all about business and he has failed (unlike Blair) to make up for that massive deficit by surrounding himself with people that do. I hope I am wrong, but I expect to see the economy improve a little on the optimism of a change of government but then for it to tank under the mismanagement of people that have even less understanding of how an economy and business works that Peppa Pig Boy and Lizzy Lightweight combined.
In that case, let me put you out of your misery: you are wrong.
The Shadow Chancellor worked as an economist for the Bank of England, the UK embassy in Washington DC and Halifax Bank of Scotland before entering the Commons. She also chaired the Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy Committee from 2017 to 2020. These are not the hallmarks of a wide-eyed ingenue that “knows fuck all about business”, are they?
Wind your bloody neck in, for Pete’s sake.
Obviously touched a nerve. As this is only your 51st post, and you clearly find it difficult to look at your own political idols with anything less than rose tinted specs I will be polite, but feel obliged to point out that it seems that it might be your neck that may be getting overdistended. And by the way, Pete really doesn't mind when I last asked him.
Certainly compared to the average Labour politician she has more credentials here than most of her colleagues, and like Starmer, she is a huge improvement on her predecessors. Just to educate your good self though, economist does not equal business person. As I am guessing you might be a bit of an enthusiastic uncritical Labour supporter I am sure that is a revelation to you, as you probably assume they are the same. They are not.
Starmer needs to do a lot more work with the business community. He still has time.
Sunak's "business" career involved working as an analyst at Goldman Sachs, and later for an array of hedge funds. Now colour me skeptical but none of those enterprises involved chasing accounts receivable, juggling cashflow and harassing customers to make that order. That's my experience of a background in "business". Sunak's most informative business education was minding the chemist's shop for his mum.
If Starmer is not already engaging with business interest groups he has no desire to become PM.
Your criticism is valid, but it is still significantly greater than Sir Kier "when I was Director of Public Prosecutions" Starmer thought n'est pas? And significantly greater than anyone on the Labour front bench unless I have missed something. Our economy requires people who don't just understand business, but understand what makes it tick. It is one of the worst aspects of our polarised system. We are about to replace one bunch who have no idea hwe a whole demographic works with another lot who are just as bad in a different direction. Maybe the LibDems are the compromise solution? (kidding)
It's "n'est-ce pas", by the way. Everyone forgets the "-ce"...
Anyway, good government needs people in Parliament who understand all parts of life. For example, what about nurses? I think Parliament would be better with more MPs who had been nurses beforehand. I can imagine an MP with a nursing background being really good for the Commons!!!
@alexwickham EXCLUSIVE: Rishi Sunak is facing a Cabinet row over plans to pay the EU for access to its Frontex border agency — which would be limited by Britain’s post-Brexit "third country" status
Before Brexit the UK was not a full member of Frontex, but it attended board meetings, took part in operations, and from 2015 didn't have to make financial contributions
Post-Brexit, the UK accepts it will have to pay, sources say
The ex-PBer @SeanT on "AI and the end of Writing":
"Putting on my pointy hat of pessimism, here’s how I think it will pan out. The machines will come for much academic work first – essays, PhDs, boring scholarly texts (unsurprisingly it can churn these out right now). Fanfic is instantly doomed, as are self-published novels. Next will be low-level journalism, copywriting, marketing, legalese, tech writing..."
Rather embarrassingly, I feel I have the imagination of a writer but not the talent. Don't get me wrong, I like to indulge in it as a hobby but I'm never going to write anything narratively as a profession. So I thought I'd give ChatGPT a go and get it to write out a scene of a story idea I had. It was okay, it probably wrote with a greater clarity than I could, and it pulled together something pretty passable. So I get it to do another. Same result. In fact, it was too much the same. Essentially, ChatGPT kind of sucks at producing original, consistent, long-form narrative. As for a PhD thesis, it might do some of the wishy-washier Humanities but I can't see it managing the natural sciences.
I think part of the reasons for this (or maybe I'm bad at wrangling the thing) is part of the limitations of the model. Ted Chiang wrote an excellent article about LLMs for the New Yorker.
Big shout out to Stodge, whose outside tip of Bradsell for the King's Stand Stakes ( I got on at 33/1) brought home a nice each way win. Fingers crossed for Galeron in the next race!
Very similar numbers from Deltapoll and occasional pollsters More In Common and it's now four polls with Labour above 45% and the Conservatives back in the mid to high 20s.
As an example, in 2019 the Conservatives won the 65+ age group 64-17 - according to Deltapoll, they now lead 41-32 which is a 19% swing in the core age group.
The ex-PBer @SeanT on "AI and the end of Writing":
"Putting on my pointy hat of pessimism, here’s how I think it will pan out. The machines will come for much academic work first – essays, PhDs, boring scholarly texts (unsurprisingly it can churn these out right now). Fanfic is instantly doomed, as are self-published novels. Next will be low-level journalism, copywriting, marketing, legalese, tech writing..."
Written porn (if that is still a thing). Rewritten journalism: most papers no longer have armies of reporters but rely on press agencies and press releases which can now be rewritten in the house style. And speaking of journalism, automatically trawling for social media reactions to television programmes or events.
Storytelling in print or onscreen: turning an idea (prompt) into a first draft to be polished and gagged up by humans. Maybe also first drafts of translations to be smoothed over by native speakers.
Tech writing might survive, as it is often tech writers who write the training material for the AI models. ChatGPT can't write the manual for Microsoft Squirrels until it has been trained on the human-written manuals and guides.
But mainly AI will open up this sort of expertise to those who could not afford it. The ones who lose out will be those at the bottom.
@alexwickham EXCLUSIVE: Rishi Sunak is facing a Cabinet row over plans to pay the EU for access to its Frontex border agency — which would be limited by Britain’s post-Brexit "third country" status
Before Brexit the UK was not a full member of Frontex, but it attended board meetings, took part in operations, and from 2015 didn't have to make financial contributions
Post-Brexit, the UK accepts it will have to pay, sources say
We were net contributors, of course we were paying.
The Australians have worked out that the best way to play against Bazball is not to get sucked into it. They've managed this test really well up to now. They have always had a response.
In the meantime, note that the federal attorney investigating Hunter Biden was appointed by Trump (and left in place by the President Biden). And the plea deal for a first time tax offender who has paid off what he owes is, if anything, on the harsh side.
So apart from catastrophically bad financial regulation, an unchecked housing boom and bust, and a huge amount of poor value PFI to make UK government debt look better Gordon Brown was a pretty good Chancellor and later PM eh?
You Brown fans are as nuts as the Tories defending Boris yesterday evening.
You think Brown was boomier and buster in housing than Thatcher?
Also Brown didn't introduce additional risk with his financial services regulation. He failed to address the systemic risk he inherited from his predecessors due to inadequate regulation.
Undoubtedly. House prices rose 206% between 1997 and 2007.
They also nearly doubled between 1982 and 1989 and then fell back much harder than 2007
I'm talking about tripling, not doubling.
Ah OK. Difference between nominal and real house prices.
Point I'm making is not that Brown got this stuff right. It's that he did the same as everyone else, but for some reason people pick him out as uniquely catastrophic.
What he did was uniquely catastrophic. Well apart from all Labour government's running out of money, that's not unique.
Can you name any other government that oversaw house prices going from a 3x income multiple to a 7x income multiple in a few years?
Can you name any other government that saw a budget surplus turned into a budget deficit of 3% in a few years before rather than after the next recession hits?
The Blair and Brown governments didn't get everything right but despite facing the worst global financial crisis since WW2 they presided over lower and more stable inflation than we've seen before or since, combined with much lower unemployment than under Thatcher and Major and stronger economic growth than under the current Tory administration. Combine with real improvements in public services, real progress on poverty reduction and a historic peace deal in Northern Ireland and you can see why most fair minded observers would view it as a relatively successful period for the UK.
"lower and more stable inflation" - unmitigated bullshit.
So housing going from £60k in 1997 to £177k in 2010 was "low and stable inflation".
Or do you mean low and stable inflation, if you exclude from inflation those costs that were going up?
I mean inflation as it is usually defined - inflation in goods and services, not asset prices.
Forcing consumer inflation to be positive was one of the main reasons the benefits of globalisation were so unevently distributed.
The ex-PBer @SeanT on "AI and the end of Writing":
"Putting on my pointy hat of pessimism, here’s how I think it will pan out. The machines will come for much academic work first – essays, PhDs, boring scholarly texts (unsurprisingly it can churn these out right now). Fanfic is instantly doomed, as are self-published novels. Next will be low-level journalism, copywriting, marketing, legalese, tech writing..."
Rather embarrassingly, I feel I have the imagination of a writer but not the talent. Don't get me wrong, I like to indulge in it as a hobby but I'm never going to write anything narratively as a profession. So I thought I'd give ChatGPT a go and get it to write out a scene of a story idea I had. It was okay, it probably wrote with a greater clarity than I could, and it pulled together something pretty passable. So I get it to do another. Same result. In fact, it was too much the same. Essentially, ChatGPT kind of sucks at producing original, consistent, long-form narrative. As for a PhD thesis, it might do some of the wishy-washier Humanities but I can't see it managing the natural sciences.
I think part of the reasons for this (or maybe I'm bad at wrangling the thing) is part of the limitations of the model. Ted Chiang wrote an excellent article about LLMs for the New Yorker.
In the meantime, note that the federal attorney investigating Hunter Biden was appointed by Trump (and left in place by the President Biden). And the plea deal for a first time tax offender who has paid off what he owes is, if anything, on the harsh side.
Hopefully this eventually means we get rid of shite columnists like Peter Hitchens and Sean Thomas.
Germany’s Bild tabloid, the biggest-selling newspaper in Europe, is to replace a range of editorial jobs with artificial intelligence as part of a €100m costcutting programme expected to lead to hundreds of redundancies.
The newspaper would “unfortunately be parting ways with colleagues who have tasks that in the digital world are performed by AI and/or automated processes”, its owner, Europe’s largest media publisher, Axel Springer SE, said in an email to staff.
It said the roles of “editors, print production staff, subeditors, proofreaders and photo editors will no longer exist as they do today”, according to the email, seen by the rival Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper (FAZ).
Comments
Those who gave Labour a big victory yesterday will be facing angry executives soon. There will almost certainly be some MPs looking for jobs elsewhere I should imagine.
https://www.espncricinfo.com/records/most-no-balls-in-an-innings-282939
It was seen as vindictive by many Tory members.
But this is all besides the point.
Polling shows that Tory 2019 voters prefer Johnson to Sunak. In the LEs we did worse than CCHQ's expectation management.
They both shows to me how unelectable he is.
(Welcome. Nice change)
I'm thinking of writing a little primer on the oil & gas industry: porosity, permeability, water injection, artificial lift, hydraulic fracturing, etc.
Would you care to help me on it?
The only possible path to redemption is for Sunak to renounce everything that has happened these years past - or be replaced by someone like Mordaunt more able to to the same - and then be seen to hug as many huskies as possible hoping voters will forget the shitshow we’ve all been subjected to since 2015. And hoping that Starmer’s ‘boring accountant’ impression doesn’t cut the mustard with voters who are seriously worried in serious times.
It’s a long shot, but nevertheless the only game in town.
One of Sunak’s significant handicaps is that he probably does believe in Brexit, despite most of his so-called friends thinking that he doesn’t.
Anyway, the Australians seem to be very quiet bat-people at the moment. Are they playing for a draw?
Edit: OUT!
I met with UK ministers on numerous occasions and in general the serious issues that we raised, and which have proven to be even worse than we predicted, were either ignored, minimized or derided.
So I have no doubt that the Conservatives have been incredibly bad for UK PLC, to the point that I actively welcome their total removal from office. In other words "F%ck the Conservatives".
That will pass when a Labour govt crashes the economy again.
Germany’s Bild tabloid, the biggest-selling newspaper in Europe, is to replace a range of editorial jobs with artificial intelligence as part of a €100m costcutting programme expected to lead to hundreds of redundancies.
The newspaper would “unfortunately be parting ways with colleagues who have tasks that in the digital world are performed by AI and/or automated processes”, its owner, Europe’s largest media publisher, Axel Springer SE, said in an email to staff.
It said the roles of “editors, print production staff, subeditors, proofreaders and photo editors will no longer exist as they do today”, according to the email, seen by the rival Frankfurter Allgemeine newspaper (FAZ).
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jun/20/german-tabloid-bild-to-replace-range-of-editorial-jobs-with-ai
I accidentally pressed allow, and now nothing will get rid of them. Like Japanese knotweed
Unfortunately
We have reached the point where, however ineffectual or duplicitous Starmer’s Labour turns out to be, few currently believe that putting this bunch of dysfunctional Tories back in for another five years could possibly turn out any better.
AI will commit suicide when OGH informs it he is going on holiday.
@tomorrowsmps
·
40s
🔵 SOMERTON & FROME: I understand that James Hamblin, chief-of-staff to David Warburton, the MP who has just quit, has applied for the Conservative selection.
1) Eng bowl Aus out.
2) Aus get the runs.
3) Thai
4) England bowl out their remaining 47 overs
5) Bad light (Or rain) stops play
No official close of play is there tonight I think ?
"Putting on my pointy hat of pessimism, here’s how I think it will pan out. The machines will come for much academic work first – essays, PhDs, boring scholarly texts (unsurprisingly it can churn these out right now). Fanfic is instantly doomed, as are self-published novels. Next will be low-level journalism, copywriting, marketing, legalese, tech writing..."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ai-is-the-end-of-writing/
So housing going from £60k in 1997 to £177k in 2010 was "low and stable inflation".
Or do you mean low and stable inflation, if you exclude from inflation those costs that were going up?
2. Open news websites only in private browsing window. That’s the one you usually use for the pr0n.
3. Install Adblock plus www.adblockplus.org
What I would do is close any Mail browser windows, delete all downloaded files in the browser cache, and (the important bit) delete any Mail-related cookies.
In any case, I was always dubious about that inflation measure. I noticed the price of basic staples skyrocketing, particularly bread, even if China was making consumer goods much cheaper.
As for council tax…
Whereas recollecting the truth about what one said and did, is way easier?
Boris Johnson xMP xPM of course being THE poster poltroon for this phenomenon.
Unfortunately Gordon Brown decided to set only one type of inflation before all others in the Bank of England's remit, rather than a balanced overview, which resulted in unprecedentedly high runaway inflation in what wasn't getting monitored and controlled inflation on what we could import from China.
A balanced policy would have looked at all types of inflation, not just one.
Should work.
Go to Safari > Settings > Websites > Notifications.
1. Select and remove Daily Mail and others from the list.
2. Uncheck "Allow websites to ask for notifications" for future.
He also believed his own BS and massively inflated a structural deficit based on the mirage of endless taxes from the City
On your Mac, choose Apple menu > System Settings, then click Notifications in the sidebar. (You may need to scroll down.)
Click an app or website on the right, then turn off Allow notifications.
You won’t receive notifications for it until you turn on “Allow notifications” again.
EXCLUSIVE: Rishi Sunak is facing a Cabinet row over plans to pay the EU for access to its Frontex border agency — which would be limited by Britain’s post-Brexit "third country" status
https://twitter.com/alexwickham/status/1671172848537280512
So much winning...
But no harm turning this off too.
Post-Brexit, the UK accepts it will have to pay, sources say
I think part of the reasons for this (or maybe I'm bad at wrangling the thing) is part of the limitations of the model. Ted Chiang wrote an excellent article about LLMs for the New Yorker.
https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annals-of-technology/chatgpt-is-a-blurry-jpeg-of-the-web
Very similar numbers from Deltapoll and occasional pollsters More In Common and it's now four polls with Labour above 45% and the Conservatives back in the mid to high 20s.
As an example, in 2019 the Conservatives won the 65+ age group 64-17 - according to Deltapoll, they now lead 41-32 which is a 19% swing in the core age group.
Storytelling in print or onscreen: turning an idea (prompt) into a first draft to be polished and gagged up by humans. Maybe also first drafts of translations to be smoothed over by native speakers.
Tech writing might survive, as it is often tech writers who write the training material for the AI models. ChatGPT can't write the manual for Microsoft Squirrels until it has been trained on the human-written manuals and guides.
But mainly AI will open up this sort of expertise to those who could not afford it. The ones who lose out will be those at the bottom.
I did this in the 2005 Edgbaston test, my contribution to England's Ashes victory has been criminally neglected.
Latest £24.9M 'transition' contract an attempt to bridge gap to contract UK.gov is due to award in September
https://www.theregister.com/2023/06/20/palantir_nhs_england_deal/
In the meantime, note that the federal attorney investigating Hunter Biden was appointed by Trump (and left in place by the President Biden). And the plea deal for a first time tax offender who has paid off what he owes is, if anything, on the harsh side.
A bit like Sam Smith calling fishermen "fisherthem".
Why has "Big Dave" left Sheffield Wednesday by mutual consent after securing promotion?
There's something wrong with you people.
It's like asking a great athlete hung with heavy iron shackles to run a fast 100m. The capability is there, but with the shackles on? No
Once we get these models out in the public domaon, entirely unshackled (and it will happen eventually), then I reckon you will see amazing things