It does say something that in a tightly controlled selection process the 2 best candidates CCHQ could come up with for the London mayoral race were an alleged groper and someone who wanted Trump to win the 2020 US election and thought Truss' budget was brilliant
A sample Tweet from the new favourite to be the Conservative Party's candidate for London Mayor.
The Tories have given up on London, and London has given up on them. It’s a truly pathetic showing.
Tonight's Standard front page:
Question to which the answer is yes.
Red Wall theory meant the Conservatives becoming the party of older people, retired homeowners, curtain twitchers and people who resent That There London.
To be clear, I'm not saying that they're all bad people, but a party that moulds itself in their image isn't going to get anywhere in our capital city.
Either something changes, or they lose their toeholds in Zone Six; I give it a decade. Every "Sold" sign in my street is 2 votes off the Conservative score and 2 onto Labour's.
And yet Shaun Bailey still managed 45% on the runoff. If the Tories have given up on London (and the quality of their candidates is sub-Brian Rose, suggesting they have), they are stupid to have done so.
That was in May 2021, peak Vaccine Hero Boris, though. It needed a strong candidate (Boris) against a distinctly shopworn one (old Ken) and a favourable national picture for the wins in 2008 and 2012 to happen. And London and the Conservatives have moved apart since then.
The Conservatives ought to be at least competitive in London, for the health of democracy if nothing else. But that requires compromises that they're currently prepared to make.
I don’t think the fundamentals have shifted that much, demographically/attitudinally speaking. It’s only a couple of years ago. The Tories have left London, rather than vice versa. A decent, centrist candidate (Rory Stewart or similar) ought to have a chance against a heavily shopworn Khan next time round.
And that's the rub. Rory ain't a Tory any more, and it probably needs someone as attention grabbing and centre(right)ist as him for the Conservatives to get anywhere. And, with a Lord Sugar "with regret", I don't see who that candidate is. Suggestions of Paul Scully and Justine Greening just highlight the problem.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
It’s pretty much the global standard (central bank independence).
It’s open for debate but the previous regime was shit.
Problem is, it was given independence when the country was awash with money due to the end of the Cold War and the start of globalisation. These days globalisation is in retreat, Russia's an enemy again and inflation is going up because wars make resources pricey. The old rules don't apply any more. We need to stop pulling levers and looking surprised when they don't work.
Less globalization should make domestic interest rates more effective at controlling inflation.
Putin is losing the war in Iraq’, says Biden in latest gaffe
Joe is so confused, US inflation is at 3%, growth is the highest in the G7, Russia is in steep decline, the debt ceiling crisis dissipated, etc etc.
The Joe is senile meme is frankly beneath you. I urge you once more to stop reading Guido.
The PB Tories must always support the more right-wing candidate. They are merely lucky that, at the moment, the GOP option is not Trump or else they would have to publicly admit that they support him.
It is like Casino's posts urging us all to vote Tory because the alternative is too awful to contemplate (for them, at least. I am not remotely bothered)
Can I just shoot thwart down right here and now if it is directed at me
I abhor Trump and everything he stands for and have consistently said so
Joe Biden is prone to gaffes and the idea that if someone mentions another of his gaffes it is a de facto comment in support of Trump is frankly ridiculous
What else are we to assume?
In your mind, but the idea Joe Biden's gaffes should not be reported is absurd and anyway it is being reported not only by Sky but other news media because in case you hadn't noticed journalists like these 'gotcha' moments
Sure, but do you take all your cues from journalists? If they jumped off the Auckland Harbour Bridge, would you follow suit?
By repeating this stuff, you play into the right wing populist idea that Biden is too senile for the role.
Do you expect some sort of polite omerta to be applied to Joe Biden's dribblings? If everyone ignores it, will it help him win another term and see it out?
No I don’t expect omertà. I just think it’s trivia. Wake me up if he starts talking to lampposts or something.
If that was my dad I'd have had a word with my siblings and googled a couple of nursing homes by now. I desperately want him to retire gracefully in favour of a younger and fitter Trump-beater.
If it is any consolation my wife and I have granted power of attorney's to our children already but we hope it will be a good long time before they act for us
Boris Johnson’s allies are expected to be named in a report published on Thursday about potential “contempts of parliament” committed following the official Partygate inquiry, the Guardian has learned.
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
The policy is the tax rate and the inflation target, each set by politicians. The operational details are up to the agency, and for the BoE it could be interest rates or other things. But the interest rate is not the aim of monetary policy; prices are; rates are fundamentally an operational tool.
The two cases would only be comparable if HMRC could modify the level of income tax or VAT in order to meet some predetermined revenue target.
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
Boris Johnson’s allies are expected to be named in a report published on Thursday about potential “contempts of parliament” committed following the official Partygate inquiry, the Guardian has learned.
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
Boris Johnson’s allies are expected to be named in a report published on Thursday about potential “contempts of parliament” committed following the official Partygate inquiry, the Guardian has learned.
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
Is it Porterhouse Blue where there's a scene where the dons gleefully contemplate the punishments that will be given out after a particularly rowdy dinner?
Putin is losing the war in Iraq’, says Biden in latest gaffe
Joe is so confused, US inflation is at 3%, growth is the highest in the G7, Russia is in steep decline, the debt ceiling crisis dissipated, etc etc.
The Joe is senile meme is frankly beneath you. I urge you once more to stop reading Guido.
The PB Tories must always support the more right-wing candidate. They are merely lucky that, at the moment, the GOP option is not Trump or else they would have to publicly admit that they support him.
It is like Casino's posts urging us all to vote Tory because the alternative is too awful to contemplate (for them, at least. I am not remotely bothered)
Can I just shoot thwart down right here and now if it is directed at me
I abhor Trump and everything he stands for and have consistently said so
Joe Biden is prone to gaffes and the idea that if someone mentions another of his gaffes it is a de facto comment in support of Trump is frankly ridiculous
I'm almost 20 years younger than Sleepy Joe and I am prone to regular senior moments. You are very fortunate to remain 100% cogent throughout your day.
Still, I may not be the President of the United States, so my faux pas are clearly not as troubling as Joe's. However a little bit of memory loss and instability on his feet seems like minor indiscretions compared to a man who is keen to sexualise his daughter, remove box upon box of national security secrets to his bathroom and incite insurrection.By comparison Joe's infringements seem relatively inconsequential.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
It’s pretty much the global standard (central bank independence).
It’s open for debate but the previous regime was shit.
Problem is, it was given independence when the country was awash with money due to the end of the Cold War and the start of globalisation. These days globalisation is in retreat, Russia's an enemy again and inflation is going up because wars make resources pricey. The old rules don't apply any more. We need to stop pulling levers and looking surprised when they don't work.
Less globalization should make domestic interest rates more effective at controlling inflation.
Not really when the chief way it used to work (variable mortgage rates resulting in rapid changes to spending) is no longer valid...
"Protest is when I say this does not please me. Resistance is when I ensure what does not please me occurs no more." Ulrike Meinhof
...who achieved exactly none of her goals and died in prison.
At least she didn't live in the ignominy of licking jackboot and thinking she enjoyed it, or of wearing a jackboot to stomp on other people. She was worth about minus a million Viewcodes.
We live in a strange transitional period. I wouldn't assume that the contradictions aren't going to cause major cracks, or that the fight is over, or that anyone who can make a reasonable "living" as an android in this little period must be right to assume that whatever doesn't hurt his brain too much to assume the security of actually is secure.
Oh wait, I forgot, nobody who dies for a cause can have been right. How will you recruit for your army, Viewcode? Just promise prospects they can shoot people and get paid for it?
@Dura_Ace - Have you read "Turn Illness Into A Weapon"?
She was an anti semitic murderer, so how that makes her non-jackbooted in any but the most literal sense is hard to see. viewcode must be a seriously terrible man.
Yeah but she was a tankie, so the Putin sycophants love her.
No, Ulrike Meinhof wasn't a tankie. That's the kind of thing that Bettina Rohl (dunno whether you even know who she is) says about her. Rohl has a right to say what she wants, of course, but what she says about Meinhof is sh*t.
Nor was Meinhof either a racist or a murderer, and those who say otherwise should have their mouths washed out with a scrubbing brush. The background to the extraparliamentary opposition in West Germany was the pro-NATO coalition between the Christian democrats and the social democrats which was backed by the large majority of deputies, and in particular it was the understanding that there was a direct line from the industrialised cool calm mass murder in the Nazi camps to the planning for cool calm nuclear armageddon on a scale of Hiroshima times 1000 or more. This is very clear from her writings. On a personal level, when Meinhof first saw footage from the Nazi camps several years after the end of WW2 she literally vomited with revulsion, because like many of her contemporaries she hadn't until then been aware of the sheer scale of the inhumanity, and finding out about it motivated her and many others to do something to try to prevent it from happening again (especially given that most of her parents' generation had done f*ck all) and next time on a much larger scale. Inhuman mass murder is inhuman mass murder - it doesn't really come in different kinds. She was a humanitarian. As for the alleged anti-Semitism, this is a total lie based on efforts by those such as Jillian Becker and on the misinterpretation of Meinhof's making the same point that August Bebel had made before her - that anti-Semitism is the "socialism" of imbeciles.
It does say something that in a tightly controlled selection process the 2 best candidates CCHQ could come up with for the London mayoral race were an alleged groper and someone who wanted Trump to win the 2020 US election and thought Truss' budget was brilliant
A sample Tweet from the new favourite to be the Conservative Party's candidate for London Mayor.
The Tories have given up on London, and London has given up on them. It’s a truly pathetic showing.
Tonight's Standard front page:
Question to which the answer is yes.
Red Wall theory meant the Conservatives becoming the party of older people, retired homeowners, curtain twitchers and people who resent That There London.
To be clear, I'm not saying that they're all bad people, but a party that moulds itself in their image isn't going to get anywhere in our capital city.
Either something changes, or they lose their toeholds in Zone Six; I give it a decade. Every "Sold" sign in my street is 2 votes off the Conservative score and 2 onto Labour's.
And yet Shaun Bailey still managed 45% on the runoff. If the Tories have given up on London (and the quality of their candidates is sub-Brian Rose, suggesting they have), they are stupid to have done so.
That was in May 2021, peak Vaccine Hero Boris, though. It needed a strong candidate (Boris) against a distinctly shopworn one (old Ken) and a favourable national picture for the wins in 2008 and 2012 to happen. And London and the Conservatives have moved apart since then.
The Conservatives ought to be at least competitive in London, for the health of democracy if nothing else. But that requires compromises that they're currently prepared to make.
I don’t think the fundamentals have shifted that much, demographically/attitudinally speaking. It’s only a couple of years ago. The Tories have left London, rather than vice versa. A decent, centrist candidate (Rory Stewart or similar) ought to have a chance against a heavily shopworn Khan next time round.
London is, however, very very far from most of the electorate. The Tories would win back a lot of places before they won back London.
Though it is worth considering why the Tories struggle so much in the Big Smoke. And the clear reason is housing affordability. People who don't own property just see their place in the economy in a fundamentally different way. Thatcher got this but nobody else on the right has done since.
The greater the gap between population growth and housing growth, the worse off the Tories will be. London is a vision of the future if the Tories don't get a grip on immigration and housebuilding.
I think that’s right - and CCHQ is kidding itself that the M25 is the boundary containing some sort of wokist Corbynlandia (or literally entirely made up of that semi-mythical ‘metropolitan elite’) that is de facto unwinnable for them. If I were planning their fightback, I’d want to start with ‘how do we win in London again’.
Their retreat into a culture war comfort zone is so strategically stupid, it’s almost breathtaking. I am no Thatcher fan - but there is no doubting that she provided a compelling enough offer (of REAL THINGS, not who-is-a-woman/stop the boats) that she broadly followed through on - and it appealed to enough people (including Londoners) to win multiple elections.
An excellent movie. The obviously unfit individuals are winnowed out through a series of entrepreneurial tests and, in the end, an enterprising young boy receives a factory. I believe more movies should be made about enterprising young boys who are given factories. —Three and a half stars. (Half a star off for the grandparents, who are sponging off the labor of Charlie and his mother. If Grandpa Joe can dance, Grandpa Joe can work.)
Boris Johnson’s allies are expected to be named in a report published on Thursday about potential “contempts of parliament” committed following the official Partygate inquiry, the Guardian has learned.
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
Putin is losing the war in Iraq’, says Biden in latest gaffe
Joe is so confused, US inflation is at 3%, growth is the highest in the G7, Russia is in steep decline, the debt ceiling crisis dissipated, etc etc.
The Joe is senile meme is frankly beneath you. I urge you once more to stop reading Guido.
The PB Tories must always support the more right-wing candidate. They are merely lucky that, at the moment, the GOP option is not Trump or else they would have to publicly admit that they support him.
It is like Casino's posts urging us all to vote Tory because the alternative is too awful to contemplate (for them, at least. I am not remotely bothered)
Can I just shoot thwart down right here and now if it is directed at me
I abhor Trump and everything he stands for and have consistently said so
Joe Biden is prone to gaffes and the idea that if someone mentions another of his gaffes it is a de facto comment in support of Trump is frankly ridiculous
I'm almost 20 years younger than Sleepy Joe and I am prone to regular senior moments. You are very fortunate to remain 100% cogent throughout your day.
Still, I may not be the President of the United States, so my faux pas are clearly not as troubling as Joe's. However a little bit of memory loss and instability on his feet seems like minor indiscretions compared to a man who is keen to sexualise his daughter, remove box upon box of national security secrets to his bathroom and incite insurrection.By comparison Joe's infringements seem relatively inconsequential.
I actually identify quite well with Joe's moments, as does my wife, and some did not realise my posting of his latest gaffe was in some ways a narrative of both my wife and I from day to day and in a strange way is rather endearing and amusing
There is no question whatsoever that Biden must beat Trump but I would suggest even for Joe's sake, a better candidate for the Democrats would not be a bad thing at all
Boris Johnson’s allies are expected to be named in a report published on Thursday about potential “contempts of parliament” committed following the official Partygate inquiry, the Guardian has learned.
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
Putin is losing the war in Iraq’, says Biden in latest gaffe
Joe is so confused, US inflation is at 3%, growth is the highest in the G7, Russia is in steep decline, the debt ceiling crisis dissipated, etc etc.
The Joe is senile meme is frankly beneath you. I urge you once more to stop reading Guido.
The PB Tories must always support the more right-wing candidate. They are merely lucky that, at the moment, the GOP option is not Trump or else they would have to publicly admit that they support him.
It is like Casino's posts urging us all to vote Tory because the alternative is too awful to contemplate (for them, at least. I am not remotely bothered)
Can I just shoot thwart down right here and now if it is directed at me
I abhor Trump and everything he stands for and have consistently said so
Joe Biden is prone to gaffes and the idea that if someone mentions another of his gaffes it is a de facto comment in support of Trump is frankly ridiculous
What else are we to assume?
In your mind, but the idea Joe Biden's gaffes should not be reported is absurd and anyway it is being reported not only by Sky but other news media because in case you hadn't noticed journalists like these 'gotcha' moments
Sure, but do you take all your cues from journalists? If they jumped off the Auckland Harbour Bridge, would you follow suit?
By repeating this stuff, you play into the right wing populist idea that Biden is too senile for the role.
Do you expect some sort of polite omerta to be applied to Joe Biden's dribblings? If everyone ignores it, will it help him win another term and see it out?
No I don’t expect omertà. I just think it’s trivia. Wake me up if he starts talking to lampposts or something.
If that was my dad I'd have had a word with my siblings and googled a couple of nursing homes by now. I desperately want him to retire gracefully in favour of a younger and fitter Trump-beater.
IF you never misspeak in your life, assuming you reach ripe old age of 30+, then you're a freaking bot.
And IF you think there is a "younger and fitter Trump-beater" just waiting in the wings to snatch up the Democratic nomination, then I've got some lovely beachfront property to sell you . . . in the Dismal Swamp.
"Protest is when I say this does not please me. Resistance is when I ensure what does not please me occurs no more." Ulrike Meinhof
...who achieved exactly none of her goals and died in prison.
At least she didn't live in the ignominy of licking jackboot and thinking she enjoyed it, or of wearing a jackboot to stomp on other people. She was worth about minus a million Viewcodes.
We live in a strange transitional period. I wouldn't assume that the contradictions aren't going to cause major cracks, or that the fight is over, or that anyone who can make a reasonable "living" as an android in this little period must be right to assume that whatever doesn't hurt his brain too much to assume the security of actually is secure.
Oh wait, I forgot, nobody who dies for a cause can have been right. How will you recruit for your army, Viewcode? Just promise prospects they can shoot people and get paid for it?
@Dura_Ace - Have you read "Turn Illness Into A Weapon"?
She was an anti semitic murderer, so how that makes her non-jackbooted in any but the most literal sense is hard to see. viewcode must be a seriously terrible man.
Yeah but she was a tankie, so the Putin sycophants love her.
No, Ulrike Meinhof wasn't a tankie. That's the kind of thing that Bettina Rohl (dunno whether you even know who she is) says about her. Rohl has a right to say what she wants, of course, but what she says about Meinhof is sh*t.
Nor was Meinhof either a racist or a murderer, and those who say otherwise should have their mouths washed out with a scrubbing brush. The background to the extraparliamentary opposition in West Germany was the pro-NATO coalition between the Christian democrats and the social democrats which was backed by the large majority of deputies, and in particular it was the understanding that there was a direct line from the industrialised cool calm mass murder in the Nazi camps to the planning for cool calm nuclear armageddon on a scale of Hiroshima times 1000 or more. This is very clear from her writings. On a personal level, when Meinhof first saw footage from the Nazi camps several years after the end of WW2 she literally vomited with revulsion, because like many of her contemporaries she hadn't until then been aware of the sheer scale of the inhumanity, and finding out about it motivated her and many others to do something to try to prevent it from happening again (especially given that most of her parents' generation had done f*ck all) and next time on a much larger scale. Inhuman mass murder is inhuman mass murder - it doesn't really come in different kinds. She was a humanitarian. As for the alleged anti-Semitism, this is a total lie based on efforts by those such as Jillian Becker and on the misinterpretation of Meinhof's making the same point that August Bebel had made before her - that anti-Semitism is the "socialism" of imbeciles.
Personally think that "Penge and Beckenham" ought to be renamed "Penge Bungalows" in honor of the (fictional?) Rumpole of the Bailey's most renowned legal victory.
Boris Johnson’s allies are expected to be named in a report published on Thursday about potential “contempts of parliament” committed following the official Partygate inquiry, the Guardian has learned.
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
Boris Johnson’s allies are expected to be named in a report published on Thursday about potential “contempts of parliament” committed following the official Partygate inquiry, the Guardian has learned.
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
Boris Johnson’s allies are expected to be named in a report published on Thursday about potential “contempts of parliament” committed following the official Partygate inquiry, the Guardian has learned.
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
"Protest is when I say this does not please me. Resistance is when I ensure what does not please me occurs no more." Ulrike Meinhof
...who achieved exactly none of her goals and died in prison.
At least she didn't live in the ignominy of licking jackboot and thinking she enjoyed it, or of wearing a jackboot to stomp on other people. She was worth about minus a million Viewcodes.
We live in a strange transitional period. I wouldn't assume that the contradictions aren't going to cause major cracks, or that the fight is over, or that anyone who can make a reasonable "living" as an android in this little period must be right to assume that whatever doesn't hurt his brain too much to assume the security of actually is secure.
Oh wait, I forgot, nobody who dies for a cause can have been right. How will you recruit for your army, Viewcode? Just promise prospects they can shoot people and get paid for it?
@Dura_Ace - Have you read "Turn Illness Into A Weapon"?
She was an anti semitic murderer, so how that makes her non-jackbooted in any but the most literal sense is hard to see. viewcode must be a seriously terrible man.
Yeah but she was a tankie, so the Putin sycophants love her.
No, Ulrike Meinhof wasn't a tankie. That's the kind of thing that Bettina Rohl (dunno whether you even know who she is) says about her. Rohl has a right to say what she wants, of course, but what she says about Meinhof is sh*t.
Nor was Meinhof either a racist or a murderer, and those who say otherwise should have their mouths washed out with a scrubbing brush. The background to the extraparliamentary opposition in West Germany was the pro-NATO coalition between the Christian democrats and the social democrats which was backed by the large majority of deputies, and in particular it was the understanding that there was a direct line from the industrialised cool calm mass murder in the Nazi camps to the planning for cool calm nuclear armageddon on a scale of Hiroshima times 1000 or more. This is very clear from her writings. On a personal level, when Meinhof first saw footage from the Nazi camps several years after the end of WW2 she literally vomited with revulsion, because like many of her contemporaries she hadn't until then been aware of the sheer scale of the inhumanity, and finding out about it motivated her and many others to do something to try to prevent it from happening again (especially given that most of her parents' generation had done f*ck all) and next time on a much larger scale. Inhuman mass murder is inhuman mass murder - it doesn't really come in different kinds. She was a humanitarian. As for the alleged anti-Semitism, this is a total lie based on efforts by those such as Jillian Becker and on the misinterpretation of Meinhof's making the same point that August Bebel had made before her - that anti-Semitism is the "socialism" of imbeciles.
Somewhat an aside - but I quite enjoyed this https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0765432/ "The Baader Meinhof Complex". Felt it was quite balanced - of an unbalanced world.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
The policy is the tax rate and the inflation target, each set by politicians. The operational details are up to the agency, and for the BoE it could be interest rates or other things. But the interest rate is not the aim of monetary policy; prices are; rates are fundamentally an operational tool.
The two cases would only be comparable if HMRC could modify the level of income tax or VAT in order to meet some predetermined revenue target.
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
You will struggle to convince any professional audience of any political persuasion that monetary policy is separate from prices and that you can have two targets for rates and prices. From central banks to opponents of CB independence to NGDP bloggers to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, they all think monetary policy is primarily about the control of prices. And "who says 2%" is literally an elected politician; the technocratic part is how to achieve Mr Hunt's order.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
Now there's a fun hypothetical policy -- the government specifies the amount of money it wants to raise and a few other constraints, and then a technocratic HMRC chooses what levels of income tax, VAT, etc to set, whether to harmonise NI and income tax, etc. I wonder what sort of tax system they'd choose?
Have we discussed the final new parliamentary boundaries for Westminster which have been released today?
So far I have noticed some changes from the revised boundaries published at the end of last year in Wales around Swansea - there are some in North Wales. as well.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
The policy is the tax rate and the inflation target, each set by politicians. The operational details are up to the agency, and for the BoE it could be interest rates or other things. But the interest rate is not the aim of monetary policy; prices are; rates are fundamentally an operational tool.
The two cases would only be comparable if HMRC could modify the level of income tax or VAT in order to meet some predetermined revenue target.
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
You will struggle to convince any professional audience of any political persuasion that monetary policy is separate from prices and that you can have two targets for rates and prices. From central banks to opponents of CB independence to NGDP bloggers to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, they all think monetary policy is primarily about the control of prices. And "who says 2%" is literally an elected politician; the technocratic part is how to achieve Mr Hunt's order.
Control of prices, but which prices?
The number one cost in the typical household's budget isn't food, gas or electricity it is housing.
The cost that the Bank's actions most immediately impact upon is housing.
And the Bank has categorically failed since it was made "independent" to ensure price stability where it matters.
As for how to achieve Mr Hunt's order, you could say the same about taxes but HMRC doesn't determine tax rates technocratically to achieve his orders, he has to choose the tax rates.
The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection.
Apart from that though, they're totally on top of things.
Kemi Badenoch looked pretty hopeless being interviewed about Thames Water earlier. It's pretty clear she's not even in the room in discussions about the Government response. Must just be Sunak, Hunt and the CS. As I said a couple of weeks ago, a sensational resignation from this statist shitshow of a Government is really her only viable path to leadership now.
"Statist" is one of those marker words. Whenever people use it, I'm absolutely certain I've got nothing in common with them politically.
I suspect that's the case.
Please do feel free to share your vision of a "non-statist" government.
My first naming pet peeve is doing North X instead of X North, which means the names are nowhere near North Y in a list.
Edit: My second is the cowardly commissioners giving in to moaners that their particular town or village is not included in a name (not all can), so pumping for generic names like South West County Name. Thank god they cannot entirely get rid of names like Mole Valley or South Holland and the Deepings.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
Labour have their fingers all over this, and it hasn't worked!
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
Kemi Badenoch looked pretty hopeless being interviewed about Thames Water earlier. It's pretty clear she's not even in the room in discussions about the Government response. Must just be Sunak, Hunt and the CS. As I said a couple of weeks ago, a sensational resignation from this statist shitshow of a Government is really her only viable path to leadership now.
"Statist" is one of those marker words. Whenever people use it, I'm absolutely certain I've got nothing in common with them politically.
I suspect that's the case.
Please do feel free to share your vision of a "non-statist" government.
Statist(statism) is one of the isms, surely? So, discrimination on the basis of stats.
A non-statist government therefore would notuse stats as the basis of discrimination/use them for decision making, i.e. would just govern by making up any old shit. The governments of the most recent three PMs all look quite non-statist to me
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
Yes there is. The gross incompetence of the government.
Doesn't make it a good reason, but it is 'a reason.'
Thames Water: wipe out the shareholders and take into government ownership.
Issue a bond - available to UK taxpayers only - to fund the long-term shit cleaning exercise.
You don't need to do that.
Equity holders get nothing. Debts are written down 50%, and the lenders are the new owners, and they can sell the business or float it on the stockmarket.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
AFAIK it was quoted as the rough cost of tackling sewage overspills and leaks before the recent or near-collapse, though.
Money that has already been lost to investors overseas, and repairs that I suspect that we in the south-east especially will also be paying, at least partly twice for.
Boris Johnson’s allies are expected to be named in a report published on Thursday about potential “contempts of parliament” committed following the official Partygate inquiry, the Guardian has learned.
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
They will cry blue murder about being silenced, but at the end of the day Parliament set up the damn inquiry, and there was a concerted campaign to undermine it from the beginning by people who care nothing about patriotism and the institutional authority of Parliament.
Parliament is sovereign - so show them that is so.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
I'm glad the fuckers are getting this on their watch. There's beautiful schadenfreude in watching a fiscally dry Sunak having to swallow Margaret's decades old leavings.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
Was there reason for previous rises, given they appear to be so badly run and not offering improvements or sensible investment?
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
Yes there is. The gross incompetence of the government.
Doesn't make it a good reason, but it is 'a reason.'
Rates (bills) are regulated based on rates of return. If they have taken on too much debt, the cost of water doesn't change, the lenders merely take a bath. (So to speak.)
Kemi Badenoch looked pretty hopeless being interviewed about Thames Water earlier. It's pretty clear she's not even in the room in discussions about the Government response. Must just be Sunak, Hunt and the CS. As I said a couple of weeks ago, a sensational resignation from this statist shitshow of a Government is really her only viable path to leadership now.
"Statist" is one of those marker words. Whenever people use it, I'm absolutely certain I've got nothing in common with them politically.
I suspect that's the case.
Please do feel free to share your vision of a "non-statist" government.
Statist(statism) is one of the isms, surely? So, discrimination on the basis of stats.
A non-statist government therefore would notuse stats as the basis of discrimination/use them for decision making, i.e. would just govern by making up any old shit. The governments of the most recent three PMs all look quite non-statist to me
(Point of order: I think your want to use 'statsist' rather than 'statist' - statist has another meaning.)
Kemi Badenoch looked pretty hopeless being interviewed about Thames Water earlier. It's pretty clear she's not even in the room in discussions about the Government response. Must just be Sunak, Hunt and the CS. As I said a couple of weeks ago, a sensational resignation from this statist shitshow of a Government is really her only viable path to leadership now.
"Statist" is one of those marker words. Whenever people use it, I'm absolutely certain I've got nothing in common with them politically.
I suspect that's the case.
Please do feel free to share your vision of a "non-statist" government.
Statist(statism) is one of the isms, surely? So, discrimination on the basis of stats.
A non-statist government therefore would notuse stats as the basis of discrimination/use them for decision making, i.e. would just govern by making up any old shit. The governments of the most recent three PMs all look quite non-statist to me
(Point of order: I think your want to use 'statsist' rather than 'statist' - statist has another meaning.)
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Great Although I chose the ethical investments option* in USS, so I'm in the clear?
*only applies to the defined contribution part though
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
I would have said a better question is, 'why did the USS expose themselves so much to a company that faced significant financial headwinds, notably the need to renew pretty much all its infrastructure?'
My first naming pet peeve is doing North X instead of X North, which means the names are nowhere near North Y in a list.
Edit: My second is the cowardly commissioners giving in to moaners that their particular town or village is not included in a name (not all can), so pumping for generic names like South West County Name. Thank god they cannot entirely get rid of names like Mole Valley or South Holland and the Deepings.
There really should be a West And North Kensington East Riding South constituency. How should be the sitting MP? Fabricant? Rees Mogg? Blackford? Diane Abbott?
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Is it really the biggest in the UK? Edit@ not being intentionally rude, but that does surprise me.
A very funny part of the BCE process is indeed all the comments from people moaning about the election results in their area, claiming it is all a fix, moaning about housing development (oh yes, even here) thinking that somehow parliamentary boundaries have anything to do with that (they do not), and people passionately, angrily demanding to be left in constituency X, thinking they have been in it for years, when in fact that was just an initial proposal and the actual constituency they are in is very different.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
The policy is the tax rate and the inflation target, each set by politicians. The operational details are up to the agency, and for the BoE it could be interest rates or other things. But the interest rate is not the aim of monetary policy; prices are; rates are fundamentally an operational tool.
The two cases would only be comparable if HMRC could modify the level of income tax or VAT in order to meet some predetermined revenue target.
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
You will struggle to convince any professional audience of any political persuasion that monetary policy is separate from prices and that you can have two targets for rates and prices. From central banks to opponents of CB independence to NGDP bloggers to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, they all think monetary policy is primarily about the control of prices. And "who says 2%" is literally an elected politician; the technocratic part is how to achieve Mr Hunt's order.
Control of prices, but which prices?
The number one cost in the typical household's budget isn't food, gas or electricity it is housing.
The cost that the Bank's actions most immediately impact upon is housing.
And the Bank has categorically failed since it was made "independent" to ensure price stability where it matters.
As for how to achieve Mr Hunt's order, you could say the same about taxes but HMRC doesn't determine tax rates technocratically to achieve his orders, he has to choose the tax rates.
Again, Mr Hunt has chosen "which prices". I imagine a house price target would be going a step too far for politicians.
The whole point of the current system is to give politicians someone else to blame and to avoid responsibility for difficult or unpopular decisions.
If it’s not working against those criteria it’s not working. And it isn’t. Because under any rational economic management fiscal and monetary policies are two sides of the same coin. They interact and need to move in tandem.
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
They could be nationalised and their customers could get a better service. See LNER.
Looking at the Boundary Commission proposals for my part of the world - East Ham remains but much reduced losing everything south of the A13 to the new West Ham & Beckton Constituency.
West Ham & Beckton is the new constituency which is Canning Town plus everything south of the A13 including Royal Docks which was in East Ham.
The northern parts of West Ham - Green Street West and Forest Gate, along with Stratford (including the New Town, won by the Greens last year) form a new Stratford & Bow Constituency with Bow East, Bow North and Bromley North from Tower Hamlets.
So, from two large constituencies, Newham has two and a half smaller constituencies (East Ham falls from nearly 89,000 electors to fewer than 71,000 so that's a 20% fall, West Ham from 98,000 to 70,590) with Stratford & Bow incorporating three Wards from Tower Hamlets - the split is 44,000 people in the Newham Wards and just iunder 30,000 in the Tower Hamlets Wards.
None of this will make much difference - Labour will hold all three seats. As far as I know, both Stephen Timms and Lyn Brown will stand again but the contest to be Labour candidate for Stratford & Bow may be interesting.
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
Kemi Badenoch looked pretty hopeless being interviewed about Thames Water earlier. It's pretty clear she's not even in the room in discussions about the Government response. Must just be Sunak, Hunt and the CS. As I said a couple of weeks ago, a sensational resignation from this statist shitshow of a Government is really her only viable path to leadership now.
"Statist" is one of those marker words. Whenever people use it, I'm absolutely certain I've got nothing in common with them politically.
I suspect that's the case.
Please do feel free to share your vision of a "non-statist" government.
Statist(statism) is one of the isms, surely? So, discrimination on the basis of stats.
A non-statist government therefore would notuse stats as the basis of discrimination/use them for decision making, i.e. would just govern by making up any old shit. The governments of the most recent three PMs all look quite non-statist to me
(Point of order: I think your want to use 'statsist' rather than 'statist' - statist has another meaning.)
I rather like the idea of government by unix commands. (I have only the slightest knowledge of unix) - government by DOS 3.2 would be ok too. (Everything that happens having a history)
I guess we'll have to settle for government by responsible people - can't wait 'til that starts! (No candidates are currently in view)
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
They could be nationalised and their customers could get a better service. See LNER.
Now, now. Tactless. You know the southrons don't like the Scots proving that things can be different even in "Britain". See, for instance, smoking bans, alcohol pricing, water non-privatisation, council housing, etc.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
....
And "formerly the biggest."
Looks like USS had a data breach too, just last month...
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
It’s pretty much the global standard (central bank independence).
It’s open for debate but the previous regime was shit.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
They could be nationalised and their customers could get a better service. See LNER.
That's what I was thinkiing.
If they're not fully nationalised we could still end up paying the 25-40% "sewage" increase, which is partly what I was alluding to. If 10 billion of public money goes in at the same time as huge price increases, essentially to pay for the private equity model that went so wrong, people are going to be absolutely livid.
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
....
And "formerly the biggest."
Looks like USS had a data breach too, just last month...
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
The policy is the tax rate and the inflation target, each set by politicians. The operational details are up to the agency, and for the BoE it could be interest rates or other things. But the interest rate is not the aim of monetary policy; prices are; rates are fundamentally an operational tool.
The two cases would only be comparable if HMRC could modify the level of income tax or VAT in order to meet some predetermined revenue target.
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
You will struggle to convince any professional audience of any political persuasion that monetary policy is separate from prices and that you can have two targets for rates and prices. From central banks to opponents of CB independence to NGDP bloggers to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, they all think monetary policy is primarily about the control of prices. And "who says 2%" is literally an elected politician; the technocratic part is how to achieve Mr Hunt's order.
Control of prices, but which prices?
The number one cost in the typical household's budget isn't food, gas or electricity it is housing.
The cost that the Bank's actions most immediately impact upon is housing.
And the Bank has categorically failed since it was made "independent" to ensure price stability where it matters.
As for how to achieve Mr Hunt's order, you could say the same about taxes but HMRC doesn't determine tax rates technocratically to achieve his orders, he has to choose the tax rates.
Again, Mr Hunt has chosen "which prices". I imagine a house price target would be going a step too far for politicians.
Except he hasn’t. It was set long before he came to Number 11 and for him to so much as express an opinion on it would be controversial.
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Great Although I chose the ethical investments option* in USS, so I'm in the clear?
*only applies to the defined contribution part though
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
AFAIK it was quoted as the rough cost of tackling sewage overspills and leaks before the recent or near-collapse, though.
Money that has already been lost to investors overseas, and repairs that I suspect that we in the south-east especially will also be paying, at least partly twice for.
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Great Although I chose the ethical investments option* in USS, so I'm in the clear?
*only applies to the defined contribution part though
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
The policy is the tax rate and the inflation target, each set by politicians. The operational details are up to the agency, and for the BoE it could be interest rates or other things. But the interest rate is not the aim of monetary policy; prices are; rates are fundamentally an operational tool.
The two cases would only be comparable if HMRC could modify the level of income tax or VAT in order to meet some predetermined revenue target.
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
You will struggle to convince any professional audience of any political persuasion that monetary policy is separate from prices and that you can have two targets for rates and prices. From central banks to opponents of CB independence to NGDP bloggers to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, they all think monetary policy is primarily about the control of prices. And "who says 2%" is literally an elected politician; the technocratic part is how to achieve Mr Hunt's order.
Control of prices, but which prices?
The number one cost in the typical household's budget isn't food, gas or electricity it is housing.
The cost that the Bank's actions most immediately impact upon is housing.
And the Bank has categorically failed since it was made "independent" to ensure price stability where it matters.
As for how to achieve Mr Hunt's order, you could say the same about taxes but HMRC doesn't determine tax rates technocratically to achieve his orders, he has to choose the tax rates.
Again, Mr Hunt has chosen "which prices". I imagine a house price target would be going a step too far for politicians.
Except he hasn’t. It was set long before he came to Number 11 and for him to so much as express an opinion on it would be controversial.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
Yes there is. The gross incompetence of the government.
Doesn't make it a good reason, but it is 'a reason.'
Surely,also,the regulator has been asleep at the wheel here.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Is it really the biggest in the UK? Edit@ not being intentionally rude, but that does surprise me.
I've also read that in the past. Quick google got it as second largest in 2006 (Wikipedia) with, then, 400k members. Not too many obvious candidates for larger among private schemes. I don't know if size is measured by members or capital invested though.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Boris Johnson’s allies are expected to be named in a report published on Thursday about potential “contempts of parliament” committed following the official Partygate inquiry, the Guardian has learned.
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
I'm no nationalisation freak, but water privatisation? I see plenty of defences of rail privatisation, so would welcome a full throated defence of the water companies.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
Yes there is. The gross incompetence of the government.
Doesn't make it a good reason, but it is 'a reason.'
Surely,also,the regulator has been asleep at the wheel here.
I think I would wonder to what extent they have been asleep at the wheel through negligence or inertia, or whether copious opioids have been delivered by the industry.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Is it really the biggest in the UK? Edit@ not being intentionally rude, but that does surprise me.
Not taken as rude. It is certainly being reported as the biggest. Surprised me too.
They’ve not had a good couple of months. They recently had a massive dats leak.
It seems that Thames Water are in the shit. They need flushing out. Will they be allowed to fail, or will the government and the regulators be too wet? I suppose it will all come out in the wash.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
Yes there is. The gross incompetence of the government.
Doesn't make it a good reason, but it is 'a reason.'
Surely,also,the regulator has been asleep at the wheel here.
I think I would wonder to what extent they have been asleep at the wheel through negligence or inertia, or whether copious opioids have been delivered by the industry.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
The policy is the tax rate and the inflation target, each set by politicians. The operational details are up to the agency, and for the BoE it could be interest rates or other things. But the interest rate is not the aim of monetary policy; prices are; rates are fundamentally an operational tool.
The two cases would only be comparable if HMRC could modify the level of income tax or VAT in order to meet some predetermined revenue target.
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
You will struggle to convince any professional audience of any political persuasion that monetary policy is separate from prices and that you can have two targets for rates and prices. From central banks to opponents of CB independence to NGDP bloggers to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, they all think monetary policy is primarily about the control of prices. And "who says 2%" is literally an elected politician; the technocratic part is how to achieve Mr Hunt's order.
Control of prices, but which prices?
The number one cost in the typical household's budget isn't food, gas or electricity it is housing.
The cost that the Bank's actions most immediately impact upon is housing.
And the Bank has categorically failed since it was made "independent" to ensure price stability where it matters.
As for how to achieve Mr Hunt's order, you could say the same about taxes but HMRC doesn't determine tax rates technocratically to achieve his orders, he has to choose the tax rates.
Again, Mr Hunt has chosen "which prices". I imagine a house price target would be going a step too far for politicians.
Except he hasn’t. It was set long before he came to Number 11 and for him to so much as express an opinion on it would be controversial.
That's democracy for you.
Democracy is when you’re not allowed to question something because Gordon Brown decided it for you decades ago…
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Is it really the biggest in the UK? Edit@ not being intentionally rude, but that does surprise me.
I've also read that in the past. Quick google got it as second largest in 2006 (Wikipedia) with, then, 400k members. Not too many obvious candidates for larger among private schemes. I don't know if size is measured by members or capital invested though.
It's the largest by market value, the gap in market value is wider than the gap by membership due to the number of members are on quite large sums.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Great Although I chose the ethical investments option* in USS, so I'm in the clear?
*only applies to the defined contribution part though
It seems that Thames Water are in the shit. They need flushing out. Will they be allowed to fail, or will the government and the regulators be too wet? I suppose it will all come out in the wash.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
Great Although I chose the ethical investments option* in USS, so I'm in the clear?
*only applies to the defined contribution part though
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
1. Wasps 2. Crocs and Gators (mainly because I'm so scared of them) 3. Rats 4. Snakes (Again scary) 5. Spiders of any great size 6. Scorpions - stay out of my shoes 7. Komodo Dragons - nasty bastards, and noticed 8. Flies - particularly Tsetse flies. 9. Leeches - that's nearly an armful! 10. Little bastard unidentifiable moving crap!
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
The policy is the tax rate and the inflation target, each set by politicians. The operational details are up to the agency, and for the BoE it could be interest rates or other things. But the interest rate is not the aim of monetary policy; prices are; rates are fundamentally an operational tool.
The two cases would only be comparable if HMRC could modify the level of income tax or VAT in order to meet some predetermined revenue target.
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
You will struggle to convince any professional audience of any political persuasion that monetary policy is separate from prices and that you can have two targets for rates and prices. From central banks to opponents of CB independence to NGDP bloggers to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, they all think monetary policy is primarily about the control of prices. And "who says 2%" is literally an elected politician; the technocratic part is how to achieve Mr Hunt's order.
Control of prices, but which prices?
The number one cost in the typical household's budget isn't food, gas or electricity it is housing.
The cost that the Bank's actions most immediately impact upon is housing.
And the Bank has categorically failed since it was made "independent" to ensure price stability where it matters.
As for how to achieve Mr Hunt's order, you could say the same about taxes but HMRC doesn't determine tax rates technocratically to achieve his orders, he has to choose the tax rates.
Again, Mr Hunt has chosen "which prices". I imagine a house price target would be going a step too far for politicians.
Except he hasn’t. It was set long before he came to Number 11 and for him to so much as express an opinion on it would be controversial.
That's democracy for you.
Democracy is when you’re not allowed to question something because Gordon Brown decided it for you decades ago…
He's the Chancellor of the Exchequer, not PA to Gordon Brown. He has broad powers under law and a mighty public platform to exert influence.
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
How the hell do you get a massive spider in your suitcase by accident? A huntsman isn’t your regular house spider, it’s the size of a dinner plate!
Quite relieved to have got out of Edinburgh alive to be honest. Need to check the car to make sure didn’t bring back any unexpected passengers.
It's not the spiders you need to worry about.
I stayed well away from Holyrood, don’t worry. 😉
I like spiders. Have some in the house. Keep the flies down. Amiable arachnids.
I've run a successful campaign, against the efforts of my wife, in convincing my children that spiders are the good guys. I didn't even have to resort to Charlotte's Web.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
....
And "formerly the biggest."
Looks like USS had a data breach too, just last month...
That was down to Capita AIUI.
They manage the fund, and have had to offer free cyber security products to all members. I’m sure Selebian would be able to add more. Capita manage one of my old DB schemes too. Although active members now are less than 300.
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
Yes there is. The gross incompetence of the government.
Doesn't make it a good reason, but it is 'a reason.'
Surely,also,the regulator has been asleep at the wheel here.
I think I would wonder to what extent they have been asleep at the wheel through negligence or inertia, or whether copious opioids have been delivered by the industry.
Regulatory capture by the industry in the view of Martin Lewis on GMB this morning.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
No.
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
The USS pension fund, the biggest in the U.K., has a 20% stake in Thames Water. More likely to become ‘had’
....
And "formerly the biggest."
Looks like USS had a data breach too, just last month...
That was down to Capita AIUI.
They manage the fund, and have had to offer free cyber security products to all members. I’m sure Selebian would be able to add more. Capita manage one of my old DB schemes too. Although active members now are less than 300.
Crapita is as Crapita does...
Your summary is about as much as I know. Time limited credit monitoring membership was offered. Should be fined out of existence imho.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
The policy is the tax rate and the inflation target, each set by politicians. The operational details are up to the agency, and for the BoE it could be interest rates or other things. But the interest rate is not the aim of monetary policy; prices are; rates are fundamentally an operational tool.
The two cases would only be comparable if HMRC could modify the level of income tax or VAT in order to meet some predetermined revenue target.
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
You will struggle to convince any professional audience of any political persuasion that monetary policy is separate from prices and that you can have two targets for rates and prices. From central banks to opponents of CB independence to NGDP bloggers to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, they all think monetary policy is primarily about the control of prices. And "who says 2%" is literally an elected politician; the technocratic part is how to achieve Mr Hunt's order.
Control of prices, but which prices?
The number one cost in the typical household's budget isn't food, gas or electricity it is housing.
The cost that the Bank's actions most immediately impact upon is housing.
And the Bank has categorically failed since it was made "independent" to ensure price stability where it matters.
As for how to achieve Mr Hunt's order, you could say the same about taxes but HMRC doesn't determine tax rates technocratically to achieve his orders, he has to choose the tax rates.
Again, Mr Hunt has chosen "which prices". I imagine a house price target would be going a step too far for politicians.
Except he hasn’t. It was set long before he came to Number 11 and for him to so much as express an opinion on it would be controversial.
That's democracy for you.
Democracy is when you’re not allowed to question something because Gordon Brown decided it for you decades ago…
He's the Chancellor of the Exchequer, not PA to Gordon Brown. He has broad powers under law and a mighty public platform to exert influence.
This setup is what leads to the perverse spectacle of cabinet ministers acting like the opposition and “calling for” action rather than just acting.
Time to nuke Edinburgh, actually nuke Scotland to be safe.
Like Indy, I hate spiders.
Stowaway African huntsman spider found in Edinburgh suitcase
The adventurous arachnid was discovered at a property in the Scottish capital after the resident returned from a work placement in Africa. Huntsman spiders use venom to immobilise their prey and can grow up to 30cm in leg span.
1. Wasps 2. Crocs and Gators (mainly because I'm so scared of them) 3. Rats 4. Snakes (Again scary) 5. Spiders of any great size 6. Scorpions - stay out of my shoes 7. Komodo Dragons - nasty bastards, and noticed 8. Flies - particularly Tsetse flies. 9. Leeches - that's nearly an armful! 10. Little bastard unidentifiable moving crap!
Botfly, especially the larvae. There’s something quite life affirming seeing them removed fro a kittens nose on YouTube.
No, let’s not reverse Central Bank independence. If the results are not impressive now, they sure as hell weren’t before-hand.
Two points:
1. I agree that the transmission of interest rates into the homebuying economy doesn’t work as well anymore. But that’s a fix to investigate, not a wholesale surrender of independence.
2. The government has a role too, and not just in keeping public sector wages down. The government is stoking inflation with the triple lock, and refuses to look at supply side (market) reform. Evidence is growing that at least some of this inflation is price gouging. Too many sectors in the UK run as effective oligopolies.
Central bank independence in the way it was implemented in the UK is one of the worst examples of post-democratic hubris. You can't depoliticise something as fundamental as monetary policy without it undermining democratic government.
Tax is even more fundamental but HMRC is operationally independent. They each get a mission, do it without interference, and report to government on how they are doing it.
That might be a valid comparison if HMRC set its own tax rates.
The policy is the tax rate and the inflation target, each set by politicians. The operational details are up to the agency, and for the BoE it could be interest rates or other things. But the interest rate is not the aim of monetary policy; prices are; rates are fundamentally an operational tool.
The two cases would only be comparable if HMRC could modify the level of income tax or VAT in order to meet some predetermined revenue target.
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
You will struggle to convince any professional audience of any political persuasion that monetary policy is separate from prices and that you can have two targets for rates and prices. From central banks to opponents of CB independence to NGDP bloggers to Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, they all think monetary policy is primarily about the control of prices. And "who says 2%" is literally an elected politician; the technocratic part is how to achieve Mr Hunt's order.
Control of prices, but which prices?
The number one cost in the typical household's budget isn't food, gas or electricity it is housing.
The cost that the Bank's actions most immediately impact upon is housing.
And the Bank has categorically failed since it was made "independent" to ensure price stability where it matters.
As for how to achieve Mr Hunt's order, you could say the same about taxes but HMRC doesn't determine tax rates technocratically to achieve his orders, he has to choose the tax rates.
Again, Mr Hunt has chosen "which prices". I imagine a house price target would be going a step too far for politicians.
Except he hasn’t. It was set long before he came to Number 11 and for him to so much as express an opinion on it would be controversial.
That's democracy for you.
Democracy is when you’re not allowed to question something because Gordon Brown decided it for you decades ago…
He's the Chancellor of the Exchequer, not PA to Gordon Brown. He has broad powers under law and a mighty public platform to exert influence.
This setup is what leads to the perverse spectacle of cabinet ministers acting like the opposition and “calling for” action rather than just acting.
Again, nobody forced them to. They are very well-paid, powerful, and mentally capable adults. (A wisecrack might have added, in that order.)
Comments
Conservative MPs and a peer who are accused of trying to disparage the privileges committee during its 14-month inquiry into Johnson’s Partygate denials are among those likely to be referenced, sources said.
An investigation by the cross-party committee concluded this month that Johnson had committed five contempts of parliament and recommended a lengthy suspension. Johnson quit as an MP after receiving the report.
A follow-up piece of work by the privileges committee has been under way for several weeks. The special report will raise issues encountered by the committee during its initial inquiry, including whether statements by Johnson’s supporters could constitute further breaches of parliamentary rules.
A contempt of parliament is defined as an act that would “prevent or hinder the work of either house of parliament”. In Johnson’s case, this was found to have included undermining the Commons democratic processes by impugning the committee, and being complicit in abuse and attempted intimidation of its members.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jun/28/partygate-rees-mogg-dorries-contempts-parliament-report-boris-johnson?CMP=share_btn_tw
The assertion that prices are the aim of monetary policy is part of the problem. Prices are only one aspect of monetary policy, and in any case, who is to say that 2% is the always the ideal level of inflation rather than 3% or -1% or 0%? Having a narrow technocratic mandate like that shuts down the scope of political debate.
That.
Still, I may not be the President of the United States, so my faux pas are clearly not as troubling as Joe's. However a little bit of memory loss and instability on his feet seems like minor indiscretions compared to a man who is keen to sexualise his daughter, remove box upon box of national security secrets to his bathroom and incite insurrection.By comparison Joe's infringements seem relatively inconsequential.
Nor was Meinhof either a racist or a murderer, and those who say otherwise should have their mouths washed out with a scrubbing brush. The background to the extraparliamentary opposition in West Germany was the pro-NATO coalition between the Christian democrats and the social democrats which was backed by the large majority of deputies, and in particular it was the understanding that there was a direct line from the industrialised cool calm mass murder in the Nazi camps to the planning for cool calm nuclear armageddon on a scale of Hiroshima times 1000 or more. This is very clear from her writings. On a personal level, when Meinhof first saw footage from the Nazi camps several years after the end of WW2 she literally vomited with revulsion, because like many of her contemporaries she hadn't until then been aware of the sheer scale of the inhumanity, and finding out about it motivated her and many others to do something to try to prevent it from happening again (especially given that most of her parents' generation had done f*ck all) and next time on a much larger scale. Inhuman mass murder is inhuman mass murder - it doesn't really come in different kinds. She was a humanitarian. As for the alleged anti-Semitism, this is a total lie based on efforts by those such as Jillian Becker and on the misinterpretation of Meinhof's making the same point that August Bebel had made before her - that anti-Semitism is the "socialism" of imbeciles.
https://fadingtheaesthetic.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/everybody-talks-about-the-weather.pdf
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lK7o-Rso-us
Their retreat into a culture war comfort zone is so strategically stupid, it’s almost breathtaking. I am no Thatcher fan - but there is no doubting that she provided a compelling enough offer (of REAL THINGS, not who-is-a-woman/stop the boats) that she broadly followed through on - and it appealed to enough people (including Londoners) to win multiple elections.
Ayn Rand Reviews Childrens Movies:
“Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory”
An excellent movie. The obviously unfit individuals are winnowed out through a series of entrepreneurial tests and, in the end, an enterprising young boy receives a factory. I believe more movies should be made about enterprising young boys who are given factories. —Three and a half stars. (Half a star off for the grandparents, who are sponging off the labor of Charlie and his mother. If Grandpa Joe can dance, Grandpa Joe can work.)
https://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/ayn-rand-reviews-childrens-movies
There is no question whatsoever that Biden must beat Trump but I would suggest even for Joe's sake, a better candidate for the Democrats would not be a bad thing at all
And IF you think there is a "younger and fitter Trump-beater" just waiting in the wings to snatch up the Democratic nomination, then I've got some lovely beachfront property to sell you . . . in the Dismal Swamp.
"The government has “no true grasp on the costs” involved in preventing a collapse of Thames Water, with estimates presented to ministers and regulators suggesting the company could be facing a hole of £10bn in its finances, the Guardian can reveal.
The water company, which serves 15 million customers, is in emergency talks with the water regulator Ofwat, ministers and government departments after the departure of its chief executive and concerns over its ability to continue operating without a multibillion cash injection."
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/28/thames-water-in-crisis-talks-over-potential-10bn-black-hole-cost-possible-collapse
10 billion pounds, with bills also going up at least 25%, if not 40, to bail out decades of leveraging. An absolute scandal, ;there's no other way to describe it.
The number one cost in the typical household's budget isn't food, gas or electricity it is housing.
The cost that the Bank's actions most immediately impact upon is housing.
And the Bank has categorically failed since it was made "independent" to ensure price stability where it matters.
As for how to achieve Mr Hunt's order, you could say the same about taxes but HMRC doesn't determine tax rates technocratically to achieve his orders, he has to choose the tax rates.
Edit: My second is the cowardly commissioners giving in to moaners that their particular town or village is not included in a name (not all can), so pumping for generic names like South West County Name. Thank god they cannot entirely get rid of names like Mole Valley or South Holland and the Deepings.
(Ok well perhaps I made that up
If Thames Water goes bust, then the lenders lose money. There is no reason why bills should rise.
A non-statist government therefore would notuse stats as the basis of discrimination/use them for decision making, i.e. would just govern by making up any old shit. The governments of the most recent three PMs all look quite non-statist to me
Doesn't make it a good reason, but it is 'a reason.'
Equity holders get nothing. Debts are written down 50%, and the lenders are the new owners, and they can sell the business or float it on the stockmarket.
Money that has already been lost to investors overseas, and repairs that I suspect that we in the south-east especially will also be paying, at least partly twice for.
Parliament is sovereign - so show them that is so.
Time to turn their, not our, taps off.
Must be something to do with governments' use of obscure Unix terminal commands then?
At a time when it is becoming more and more of a political issue getting U.K. pensions funds to invest ‘in Britain’. Would people want their funds investing more in such risky assets.
*only applies to the defined contribution part though
If it’s not working against those criteria it’s not working. And it isn’t. Because under any rational economic management fiscal and monetary policies are two sides of the same coin. They interact and need to move in tandem.
And they aren’t.
Looking at the Boundary Commission proposals for my part of the world - East Ham remains but much reduced losing everything south of the A13 to the new West Ham & Beckton Constituency.
West Ham & Beckton is the new constituency which is Canning Town plus everything south of the A13 including Royal Docks which was in East Ham.
The northern parts of West Ham - Green Street West and Forest Gate, along with Stratford (including the New Town, won by the Greens last year) form a new Stratford & Bow Constituency with Bow East, Bow North and Bromley North from Tower Hamlets.
So, from two large constituencies, Newham has two and a half smaller constituencies (East Ham falls from nearly 89,000 electors to fewer than 71,000 so that's a 20% fall, West Ham from 98,000 to 70,590) with Stratford & Bow incorporating three Wards from Tower Hamlets - the split is 44,000 people in the Newham Wards and just iunder 30,000 in the Tower Hamlets Wards.
None of this will make much difference - Labour will hold all three seats. As far as I know, both Stephen Timms and Lyn Brown will stand again but the contest to be Labour candidate for Stratford & Bow may be interesting.
I guess we'll have to settle for government by responsible people - can't wait 'til that starts! (No candidates are currently in view)
If they're not fully nationalised we could still end up paying the 25-40% "sewage" increase, which is partly what I was alluding to. If 10 billion of public money goes in at the same time as huge price increases, essentially to pay for the private equity model that went so wrong, people are going to be absolutely livid.
The latter hates SNAKES, not spiders!
(would have c and p'd it but that seems mean for a whole poem by a modern auithor)
They’ve not had a good couple of months. They recently had a massive dats leak.
https://exelerating.com/en/insights/top-10-pension-funds-in-the-uk/
1. Wasps
2. Crocs and Gators (mainly because I'm so scared of them)
3. Rats
4. Snakes (Again scary)
5. Spiders of any great size
6. Scorpions - stay out of my shoes
7. Komodo Dragons - nasty bastards, and noticed
8. Flies - particularly Tsetse flies.
9. Leeches - that's nearly an armful!
10. Little bastard unidentifiable moving crap!
Your summary is about as much as I know. Time limited credit monitoring membership was offered. Should be fined out of existence imho.
Cordyceps
Tarantula hawk wasps