Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Starmer should do PMQs even when Sunak isn’t there – politicalbetting.com

135

Comments

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cicero said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    From the Times,


    Looks like Sunak is interested in breaching the 20% floor.

    HYUFD has made repeated arguments lately that the Tories should go for the REFUK 9% share of the vote.

    Perhaps they'll get it?
    They certainly need to win back much of the 9% RefUK vote.

    At the moment Sunak and Hunt are refusing nurses and teachers even a below inflation pay rise, so that is the public sector vote gone to Labour (and to be fair many of the Cabinet from Barclay to Braverman to Chalk to Keegan think they are wrong on that).

    Sunak is also a Leaver and beyond the Windsor framework for NI is refusing to do anything to soften Boris' Brexit deal so that is the Remainer vote gone to Labour and the LDs.

    Sunak is also not doing much to stop the boats and reduce immigation, so that is seeing hardline redwall Brexiteers go RefUK or even back to Labour.

    Hunt is also refusing to even consider any pre election tax cuts, so that is the Thatcherite on economics vote either staying home or also going RefUK.

    Until inflation and interest rates really start to come down mortgage holders will mostly keep voting Labour having switched from the Tories after the Truss budget.

    So who is still voting Tory? Well mostly Leave voting home owning pensioners who aren't too bothered about immigration and fiscal conservatives working in the private sector who own or nearly own outright their properties and are on a high income and not too affected by cost of living.

    Not much scope for re electing lots of Tory MPs with just them however
    The Tories absolutely do not need to win the fruitcake, nut and loon vote.

    You summarise well why the Tories are struggling, but the solution to that is to smartly try to do well on some of those issues and come across as better than the Opposition.

    The Government seems to have given up. And if they give up and just rely on the racist vote, that will drive away more votes than it wins them.
    The Tories are more likely to win back the 9% voting RefUK than the Remainers voting LD or the redwall voters who only lent them their votes to get Brexit done and now it has done have gone back to Labour.

    Mortgage holders won't come back either until interest rates and inflation are well down from current levels whatever the Tories cultural position
    You're assuming you can just appeal to the bigots and not lose anyone already supporting you, or who could.

    You show a remarkable lack of understanding of the concept of Opportunity Cost. If you go for the racist vote you may get it. But it may be all you get.

    The Tories have no divine right not to lose any more of those who are currently supporting them.
    You are already voting LD or even Starmer Labour so we lost you long ago and you aren't coming back for the next election at least so why should we care what you think at the moment? After all we still got 30-31% and over 150 seats even in 1997 and 2001 when you voted New Labour (not to forget your vote for Farage in the 2019 Euros too)
    The trick of achieving power is to persuade those who may disagree with you on some things to support you nonetheless. Your version of politics seems to be the precise opposite. You seem to want to alienate even previous members of your party, let alone mere voters and supporters, because they lack sufficient loyalty to some nebulous far right cause. Apparently only the right should support the Conservatives, but many RefUK voters will not do so, no matter what, and some of them could even vote for other parties. Centrists that used to support the Conservatives view this ideological arrogance as being about as attractive as the barking of a mad dog.

    In the end you will find that they only person sufficiently loyal is you, and that no one else is interested. The further right the Conservatives swing, the fewer voters will be attracted to them. I mean I am not opposed to this suicidal swing, because I want the Conservatives removed from power for the foreseeable future, but for those who still believe in the brand, the Tories are becoming the revolutionaries that eat their own children.

    The Tories governed successfully from the centre right and arguably their problems have resulted from their steady move away from the centre.

    They fact that this move away from the centre has also involved a move from honesty, probity, decency, and competence is another problem.

    Good afternoon

    Excellent post and it is a sad day when a conservative actively dismisses conservative supporters over decades who simply reject the politics of the right and RefUK

    @HYUFD is a closet RefUK supporter who is in thrall to Johnson, Farage and Trump and parrots their cause whenever be can, while looking rather ridiculous

    He and his like are a Trojan horse ensuring the breakup of the conservative party, and with his often far right little Englander attitude is destined to be as relevant going forward as Corbyn is today

    I was appalled at Jenrick's painting over of the Mickey Mouse cartoon and Braverman and him need removing from any influence on the government

    Of courses @HYUFD response will be I am not a true Tory having voted for Blair previously and likely to vote Lib Dem or even Labour in GE24 as an objection to Robin Millar and his gang of 25 troublemakers

    I would just say that if in 12 months the labour party are looking at a landslide, I do not rule out many former conservative supporters holding their noses and vote for the party to mitigate a labour majority, before entering a period or enforced reflection
    I have never voted for a Farage led party in my life, unlike say Bart.

    Nor have I voted Labour at a general election before, unlike you. I am a loyal Tory who wants the best for my party
    You voted Plaid and your attitude is like putting a blue rosette on a donkey
    I voted for all 4 Tory candidates even on that Town Council ballot paper, I just used all my 6 votes

    You voted Labour twice at a general election over the Tory candidates
    You gave succour to separatism! That's worse than voting Labour.
    I would have voted for Labour or LDs had they put up candidates for my last 2 but there were no Labour or LD candidates and I had already voted for all the 4 Tory candidates
    Basic rule - never ever vote for the opposition. It might give them that last vote needed in a borderline transferred vote situation.
    It was for Aberystwyth Town Council for goodness sake, not Westminster or even the Senedd or county council and even then I had already voted for every Tory candidate
    So? That's how careers begin. Just think how different things would be if Mr Johnson hadn't become President of the Oxford Union, or Ms Truss a LD committee member.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Promoting a stable economy for business?
    Promoting food and wider security?
    Maintaining the currency at a decent level?
    Ditto the balance of payments?
    Promoting morality at the heart of government?
    Goiverning for all classes and all parts of the UK?
    You would expect all parties to support those objectives, only the first and fourth could even be said to be slightly more a Conservative than Labour value
    Er ... look again. The last, for instance, is diametrically opposed to your emphasis on houseoners and the wealthy and their heirs.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,003
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cicero said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    From the Times,


    Looks like Sunak is interested in breaching the 20% floor.

    HYUFD has made repeated arguments lately that the Tories should go for the REFUK 9% share of the vote.

    Perhaps they'll get it?
    They certainly need to win back much of the 9% RefUK vote.

    At the moment Sunak and Hunt are refusing nurses and teachers even a below inflation pay rise, so that is the public sector vote gone to Labour (and to be fair many of the Cabinet from Barclay to Braverman to Chalk to Keegan think they are wrong on that).

    Sunak is also a Leaver and beyond the Windsor framework for NI is refusing to do anything to soften Boris' Brexit deal so that is the Remainer vote gone to Labour and the LDs.

    Sunak is also not doing much to stop the boats and reduce immigation, so that is seeing hardline redwall Brexiteers go RefUK or even back to Labour.

    Hunt is also refusing to even consider any pre election tax cuts, so that is the Thatcherite on economics vote either staying home or also going RefUK.

    Until inflation and interest rates really start to come down mortgage holders will mostly keep voting Labour having switched from the Tories after the Truss budget.

    So who is still voting Tory? Well mostly Leave voting home owning pensioners who aren't too bothered about immigration and fiscal conservatives working in the private sector who own or nearly own outright their properties and are on a high income and not too affected by cost of living.

    Not much scope for re electing lots of Tory MPs with just them however
    The Tories absolutely do not need to win the fruitcake, nut and loon vote.

    You summarise well why the Tories are struggling, but the solution to that is to smartly try to do well on some of those issues and come across as better than the Opposition.

    The Government seems to have given up. And if they give up and just rely on the racist vote, that will drive away more votes than it wins them.
    The Tories are more likely to win back the 9% voting RefUK than the Remainers voting LD or the redwall voters who only lent them their votes to get Brexit done and now it has done have gone back to Labour.

    Mortgage holders won't come back either until interest rates and inflation are well down from current levels whatever the Tories cultural position
    You're assuming you can just appeal to the bigots and not lose anyone already supporting you, or who could.

    You show a remarkable lack of understanding of the concept of Opportunity Cost. If you go for the racist vote you may get it. But it may be all you get.

    The Tories have no divine right not to lose any more of those who are currently supporting them.
    You are already voting LD or even Starmer Labour so we lost you long ago and you aren't coming back for the next election at least so why should we care what you think at the moment? After all we still got 30-31% and over 150 seats even in 1997 and 2001 when you voted New Labour (not to forget your vote for Farage in the 2019 Euros too)
    The trick of achieving power is to persuade those who may disagree with you on some things to support you nonetheless. Your version of politics seems to be the precise opposite. You seem to want to alienate even previous members of your party, let alone mere voters and supporters, because they lack sufficient loyalty to some nebulous far right cause. Apparently only the right should support the Conservatives, but many RefUK voters will not do so, no matter what, and some of them could even vote for other parties. Centrists that used to support the Conservatives view this ideological arrogance as being about as attractive as the barking of a mad dog.

    In the end you will find that they only person sufficiently loyal is you, and that no one else is interested. The further right the Conservatives swing, the fewer voters will be attracted to them. I mean I am not opposed to this suicidal swing, because I want the Conservatives removed from power for the foreseeable future, but for those who still believe in the brand, the Tories are becoming the revolutionaries that eat their own children.

    The Tories governed successfully from the centre right and arguably their problems have resulted from their steady move away from the centre.

    They fact that this move away from the centre has also involved a move from honesty, probity, decency, and competence is another problem.

    Good afternoon

    Excellent post and it is a sad day when a conservative actively dismisses conservative supporters over decades who simply reject the politics of the right and RefUK

    @HYUFD is a closet RefUK supporter who is in thrall to Johnson, Farage and Trump and parrots their cause whenever be can, while looking rather ridiculous

    He and his like are a Trojan horse ensuring the breakup of the conservative party, and with his often far right little Englander attitude is destined to be as relevant going forward as Corbyn is today

    I was appalled at Jenrick's painting over of the Mickey Mouse cartoon and Braverman and him need removing from any influence on the government

    Of courses @HYUFD response will be I am not a true Tory having voted for Blair previously and likely to vote Lib Dem or even Labour in GE24 as an objection to Robin Millar and his gang of 25 troublemakers

    I would just say that if in 12 months the labour party are looking at a landslide, I do not rule out many former conservative supporters holding their noses and vote for the party to mitigate a labour majority, before entering a period or enforced reflection
    I have never voted for a Farage led party in my life, unlike say Bart.

    Nor have I voted Labour at a general election before, unlike you. I am a loyal Tory who wants the best for my party
    You voted Plaid and your attitude is like putting a blue rosette on a donkey
    I voted for all 4 Tory candidates even on that Town Council ballot paper, I just used all my 6 votes

    You voted Labour twice at a general election over the Tory candidates
    You gave succour to separatism! That's worse than voting Labour.
    I would have voted for Labour or LDs had they put up candidates for my last 2 but there were no Labour or LD candidates and I had already voted for all the 4 Tory candidates
    Basic rule - never ever vote for the opposition. It might give them that last vote needed in a borderline transferred vote situation.
    It was for Aberystwyth Town Council for goodness sake, not Westminster or even the Senedd or county council and even then I had already voted for every Tory candidate
    So? That's how careers begin. Just think how different things would be if Mr Johnson hadn't become President of the Oxford Union, or Ms Truss a LD committee member.
    Since when was Aberystwyth Town Council the Oxford Union? (Albeit Justine Greening was once an Epping Town Councillor like I was)
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,572

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Belief in Brexit: higher prices and businesses moving abroad. What else?
    Support for homeowners: with mega mortgage rates and the economic disaster that brings?
    Cutting inflation: by increasing inflation?
    "Wokeism": next up on GBeebies, over to Nadine, 30p Lee and Jacob RM to tell us all about it
    Tax Cuts: they're the highest ever in peacetime

    Even your "core values" are a lie. You've done the Exact Opposite of them.
    And its a miserable prospectus in the first place; one surely headed for its just desserts.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    edited July 2023

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cicero said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    From the Times,


    Looks like Sunak is interested in breaching the 20% floor.

    HYUFD has made repeated arguments lately that the Tories should go for the REFUK 9% share of the vote.

    Perhaps they'll get it?
    They certainly need to win back much of the 9% RefUK vote.

    At the moment Sunak and Hunt are refusing nurses and teachers even a below inflation pay rise, so that is the public sector vote gone to Labour (and to be fair many of the Cabinet from Barclay to Braverman to Chalk to Keegan think they are wrong on that).

    Sunak is also a Leaver and beyond the Windsor framework for NI is refusing to do anything to soften Boris' Brexit deal so that is the Remainer vote gone to Labour and the LDs.

    Sunak is also not doing much to stop the boats and reduce immigation, so that is seeing hardline redwall Brexiteers go RefUK or even back to Labour.

    Hunt is also refusing to even consider any pre election tax cuts, so that is the Thatcherite on economics vote either staying home or also going RefUK.

    Until inflation and interest rates really start to come down mortgage holders will mostly keep voting Labour having switched from the Tories after the Truss budget.

    So who is still voting Tory? Well mostly Leave voting home owning pensioners who aren't too bothered about immigration and fiscal conservatives working in the private sector who own or nearly own outright their properties and are on a high income and not too affected by cost of living.

    Not much scope for re electing lots of Tory MPs with just them however
    The Tories absolutely do not need to win the fruitcake, nut and loon vote.

    You summarise well why the Tories are struggling, but the solution to that is to smartly try to do well on some of those issues and come across as better than the Opposition.

    The Government seems to have given up. And if they give up and just rely on the racist vote, that will drive away more votes than it wins them.
    The Tories are more likely to win back the 9% voting RefUK than the Remainers voting LD or the redwall voters who only lent them their votes to get Brexit done and now it has done have gone back to Labour.

    Mortgage holders won't come back either until interest rates and inflation are well down from current levels whatever the Tories cultural position
    You're assuming you can just appeal to the bigots and not lose anyone already supporting you, or who could.

    You show a remarkable lack of understanding of the concept of Opportunity Cost. If you go for the racist vote you may get it. But it may be all you get.

    The Tories have no divine right not to lose any more of those who are currently supporting them.
    You are already voting LD or even Starmer Labour so we lost you long ago and you aren't coming back for the next election at least so why should we care what you think at the moment? After all we still got 30-31% and over 150 seats even in 1997 and 2001 when you voted New Labour (not to forget your vote for Farage in the 2019 Euros too)
    The trick of achieving power is to persuade those who may disagree with you on some things to support you nonetheless. Your version of politics seems to be the precise opposite. You seem to want to alienate even previous members of your party, let alone mere voters and supporters, because they lack sufficient loyalty to some nebulous far right cause. Apparently only the right should support the Conservatives, but many RefUK voters will not do so, no matter what, and some of them could even vote for other parties. Centrists that used to support the Conservatives view this ideological arrogance as being about as attractive as the barking of a mad dog.

    In the end you will find that they only person sufficiently loyal is you, and that no one else is interested. The further right the Conservatives swing, the fewer voters will be attracted to them. I mean I am not opposed to this suicidal swing, because I want the Conservatives removed from power for the foreseeable future, but for those who still believe in the brand, the Tories are becoming the revolutionaries that eat their own children.

    The Tories governed successfully from the centre right and arguably their problems have resulted from their steady move away from the centre.

    They fact that this move away from the centre has also involved a move from honesty, probity, decency, and competence is another problem.

    Good afternoon

    Excellent post and it is a sad day when a conservative actively dismisses conservative supporters over decades who simply reject the politics of the right and RefUK

    @HYUFD is a closet RefUK supporter who is in thrall to Johnson, Farage and Trump and parrots their cause whenever be can, while looking rather ridiculous

    He and his like are a Trojan horse ensuring the breakup of the conservative party, and with his often far right little Englander attitude is destined to be as relevant going forward as Corbyn is today

    I was appalled at Jenrick's painting over of the Mickey Mouse cartoon and Braverman and him need removing from any influence on the government

    Of courses @HYUFD response will be I am not a true Tory having voted for Blair previously and likely to vote Lib Dem or even Labour in GE24 as an objection to Robin Millar and his gang of 25 troublemakers

    I would just say that if in 12 months the labour party are looking at a landslide, I do not rule out many former conservative supporters holding their noses and vote for the party to mitigate a labour majority, before entering a period or enforced reflection
    I have never voted for a Farage led party in my life, unlike say Bart.

    Nor have I voted Labour at a general election before, unlike you. I am a loyal Tory who wants the best for my party
    You voted Plaid and your attitude is like putting a blue rosette on a donkey
    I voted for all 4 Tory candidates even on that Town Council ballot paper, I just used all my 6 votes

    You voted Labour twice at a general election over the Tory candidates
    You gave succour to separatism! That's worse than voting Labour.
    Plaid Cymru wasn't separatist at the time. I know that's in theory official party policy now, but in much the same way as privatising the NHS is a goal of the Cornerstone group. Plaid is much looser in its philosophy than any other party, including the SNP.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,572
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cicero said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    From the Times,


    Looks like Sunak is interested in breaching the 20% floor.

    HYUFD has made repeated arguments lately that the Tories should go for the REFUK 9% share of the vote.

    Perhaps they'll get it?
    They certainly need to win back much of the 9% RefUK vote.

    At the moment Sunak and Hunt are refusing nurses and teachers even a below inflation pay rise, so that is the public sector vote gone to Labour (and to be fair many of the Cabinet from Barclay to Braverman to Chalk to Keegan think they are wrong on that).

    Sunak is also a Leaver and beyond the Windsor framework for NI is refusing to do anything to soften Boris' Brexit deal so that is the Remainer vote gone to Labour and the LDs.

    Sunak is also not doing much to stop the boats and reduce immigation, so that is seeing hardline redwall Brexiteers go RefUK or even back to Labour.

    Hunt is also refusing to even consider any pre election tax cuts, so that is the Thatcherite on economics vote either staying home or also going RefUK.

    Until inflation and interest rates really start to come down mortgage holders will mostly keep voting Labour having switched from the Tories after the Truss budget.

    So who is still voting Tory? Well mostly Leave voting home owning pensioners who aren't too bothered about immigration and fiscal conservatives working in the private sector who own or nearly own outright their properties and are on a high income and not too affected by cost of living.

    Not much scope for re electing lots of Tory MPs with just them however
    The Tories absolutely do not need to win the fruitcake, nut and loon vote.

    You summarise well why the Tories are struggling, but the solution to that is to smartly try to do well on some of those issues and come across as better than the Opposition.

    The Government seems to have given up. And if they give up and just rely on the racist vote, that will drive away more votes than it wins them.
    The Tories are more likely to win back the 9% voting RefUK than the Remainers voting LD or the redwall voters who only lent them their votes to get Brexit done and now it has done have gone back to Labour.

    Mortgage holders won't come back either until interest rates and inflation are well down from current levels whatever the Tories cultural position
    You're assuming you can just appeal to the bigots and not lose anyone already supporting you, or who could.

    You show a remarkable lack of understanding of the concept of Opportunity Cost. If you go for the racist vote you may get it. But it may be all you get.

    The Tories have no divine right not to lose any more of those who are currently supporting them.
    You are already voting LD or even Starmer Labour so we lost you long ago and you aren't coming back for the next election at least so why should we care what you think at the moment? After all we still got 30-31% and over 150 seats even in 1997 and 2001 when you voted New Labour (not to forget your vote for Farage in the 2019 Euros too)
    The trick of achieving power is to persuade those who may disagree with you on some things to support you nonetheless. Your version of politics seems to be the precise opposite. You seem to want to alienate even previous members of your party, let alone mere voters and supporters, because they lack sufficient loyalty to some nebulous far right cause. Apparently only the right should support the Conservatives, but many RefUK voters will not do so, no matter what, and some of them could even vote for other parties. Centrists that used to support the Conservatives view this ideological arrogance as being about as attractive as the barking of a mad dog.

    In the end you will find that they only person sufficiently loyal is you, and that no one else is interested. The further right the Conservatives swing, the fewer voters will be attracted to them. I mean I am not opposed to this suicidal swing, because I want the Conservatives removed from power for the foreseeable future, but for those who still believe in the brand, the Tories are becoming the revolutionaries that eat their own children.

    The Tories governed successfully from the centre right and arguably their problems have resulted from their steady move away from the centre.

    They fact that this move away from the centre has also involved a move from honesty, probity, decency, and competence is another problem.

    Good afternoon

    Excellent post and it is a sad day when a conservative actively dismisses conservative supporters over decades who simply reject the politics of the right and RefUK

    @HYUFD is a closet RefUK supporter who is in thrall to Johnson, Farage and Trump and parrots their cause whenever be can, while looking rather ridiculous

    He and his like are a Trojan horse ensuring the breakup of the conservative party, and with his often far right little Englander attitude is destined to be as relevant going forward as Corbyn is today

    I was appalled at Jenrick's painting over of the Mickey Mouse cartoon and Braverman and him need removing from any influence on the government

    Of courses @HYUFD response will be I am not a true Tory having voted for Blair previously and likely to vote Lib Dem or even Labour in GE24 as an objection to Robin Millar and his gang of 25 troublemakers

    I would just say that if in 12 months the labour party are looking at a landslide, I do not rule out many former conservative supporters holding their noses and vote for the party to mitigate a labour majority, before entering a period or enforced reflection
    I have never voted for a Farage led party in my life, unlike say Bart.

    Nor have I voted Labour at a general election before, unlike you. I am a loyal Tory who wants the best for my party
    You voted Plaid and your attitude is like putting a blue rosette on a donkey
    I voted for all 4 Tory candidates even on that Town Council ballot paper, I just used all my 6 votes

    You voted Labour twice at a general election over the Tory candidates
    You gave succour to separatism! That's worse than voting Labour.
    I would have voted for Labour or LDs had they put up candidates for my last 2 but there were no Labour or LD candidates and I had already voted for all the 4 Tory candidates
    Basic rule - never ever vote for the opposition. It might give them that last vote needed in a borderline transferred vote situation.
    It was for Aberystwyth Town Council for goodness sake, not Westminster or even the Senedd or county council and even then I had already voted for every Tory candidate
    A true Tory would have voted for them again.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,069

    Paging @Leon


    Eric Feigl-Ding
    @DrEricDing

    WOW—Harvard professor Avi Loeb believes he may have found fragments of alien technology from a meteor that landed in 2014. Loeb’s team brought the materials back for analysis. U.S. Space Command confirms with almost near certainty, 99.999%, that it came from another solar system.

    https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1677425554520170501

    “We will analyse it, figure out what it’s made of and determine whether it’s natural, or a relic of a probe or a spacecraft,” he explained. “If it’s natural, we will learn something new about the environment beyond our cosmic backyard. In principle, there’s a chance it could be artificial, in which case the impact on humanity will be far greater.”

    So, in principle there is a chance that it could be artificial. Wow, indeed.
    Peer reviewed article in scholarly journal + peer reviewed critique awaited. If it happened it would be interesting reading.

    If there any chance of this being true it would make the lead story of every front page in the world. As Asquith said, Wait and see.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Belief in Brexit? Which you opposed. So by your own measure you don't share core Tory values.
    Quite. That's our upholding of morality in politics done for the weekend. Now to go off and look at diesel movies or something. Actually I am off to find out how on earth the Victorians measured torsional deflections in *spinning" propeller shafts on ships - something I came across mentioned almost in passing in an engineering history.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    IanB2 said:

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Belief in Brexit: higher prices and businesses moving abroad. What else?
    Support for homeowners: with mega mortgage rates and the economic disaster that brings?
    Cutting inflation: by increasing inflation?
    "Wokeism": next up on GBeebies, over to Nadine, 30p Lee and Jacob RM to tell us all about it
    Tax Cuts: they're the highest ever in peacetime

    Even your "core values" are a lie. You've done the Exact Opposite of them.
    And its a miserable prospectus in the first place; one surely headed for its just desserts.
    Eton Mess, obvs.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cicero said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    From the Times,


    Looks like Sunak is interested in breaching the 20% floor.

    HYUFD has made repeated arguments lately that the Tories should go for the REFUK 9% share of the vote.

    Perhaps they'll get it?
    They certainly need to win back much of the 9% RefUK vote.

    At the moment Sunak and Hunt are refusing nurses and teachers even a below inflation pay rise, so that is the public sector vote gone to Labour (and to be fair many of the Cabinet from Barclay to Braverman to Chalk to Keegan think they are wrong on that).

    Sunak is also a Leaver and beyond the Windsor framework for NI is refusing to do anything to soften Boris' Brexit deal so that is the Remainer vote gone to Labour and the LDs.

    Sunak is also not doing much to stop the boats and reduce immigation, so that is seeing hardline redwall Brexiteers go RefUK or even back to Labour.

    Hunt is also refusing to even consider any pre election tax cuts, so that is the Thatcherite on economics vote either staying home or also going RefUK.

    Until inflation and interest rates really start to come down mortgage holders will mostly keep voting Labour having switched from the Tories after the Truss budget.

    So who is still voting Tory? Well mostly Leave voting home owning pensioners who aren't too bothered about immigration and fiscal conservatives working in the private sector who own or nearly own outright their properties and are on a high income and not too affected by cost of living.

    Not much scope for re electing lots of Tory MPs with just them however
    The Tories absolutely do not need to win the fruitcake, nut and loon vote.

    You summarise well why the Tories are struggling, but the solution to that is to smartly try to do well on some of those issues and come across as better than the Opposition.

    The Government seems to have given up. And if they give up and just rely on the racist vote, that will drive away more votes than it wins them.
    The Tories are more likely to win back the 9% voting RefUK than the Remainers voting LD or the redwall voters who only lent them their votes to get Brexit done and now it has done have gone back to Labour.

    Mortgage holders won't come back either until interest rates and inflation are well down from current levels whatever the Tories cultural position
    You're assuming you can just appeal to the bigots and not lose anyone already supporting you, or who could.

    You show a remarkable lack of understanding of the concept of Opportunity Cost. If you go for the racist vote you may get it. But it may be all you get.

    The Tories have no divine right not to lose any more of those who are currently supporting them.
    You are already voting LD or even Starmer Labour so we lost you long ago and you aren't coming back for the next election at least so why should we care what you think at the moment? After all we still got 30-31% and over 150 seats even in 1997 and 2001 when you voted New Labour (not to forget your vote for Farage in the 2019 Euros too)
    The trick of achieving power is to persuade those who may disagree with you on some things to support you nonetheless. Your version of politics seems to be the precise opposite. You seem to want to alienate even previous members of your party, let alone mere voters and supporters, because they lack sufficient loyalty to some nebulous far right cause. Apparently only the right should support the Conservatives, but many RefUK voters will not do so, no matter what, and some of them could even vote for other parties. Centrists that used to support the Conservatives view this ideological arrogance as being about as attractive as the barking of a mad dog.

    In the end you will find that they only person sufficiently loyal is you, and that no one else is interested. The further right the Conservatives swing, the fewer voters will be attracted to them. I mean I am not opposed to this suicidal swing, because I want the Conservatives removed from power for the foreseeable future, but for those who still believe in the brand, the Tories are becoming the revolutionaries that eat their own children.

    The Tories governed successfully from the centre right and arguably their problems have resulted from their steady move away from the centre.

    They fact that this move away from the centre has also involved a move from honesty, probity, decency, and competence is another problem.

    Good afternoon

    Excellent post and it is a sad day when a conservative actively dismisses conservative supporters over decades who simply reject the politics of the right and RefUK

    @HYUFD is a closet RefUK supporter who is in thrall to Johnson, Farage and Trump and parrots their cause whenever be can, while looking rather ridiculous

    He and his like are a Trojan horse ensuring the breakup of the conservative party, and with his often far right little Englander attitude is destined to be as relevant going forward as Corbyn is today

    I was appalled at Jenrick's painting over of the Mickey Mouse cartoon and Braverman and him need removing from any influence on the government

    Of courses @HYUFD response will be I am not a true Tory having voted for Blair previously and likely to vote Lib Dem or even Labour in GE24 as an objection to Robin Millar and his gang of 25 troublemakers

    I would just say that if in 12 months the labour party are looking at a landslide, I do not rule out many former conservative supporters holding their noses and vote for the party to mitigate a labour majority, before entering a period or enforced reflection
    I have never voted for a Farage led party in my life, unlike say Bart.

    Nor have I voted Labour at a general election before, unlike you. I am a loyal Tory who wants the best for my party
    You voted Plaid and your attitude is like putting a blue rosette on a donkey
    I voted for all 4 Tory candidates even on that Town Council ballot paper, I just used all my 6 votes

    You voted Labour twice at a general election over the Tory candidates
    You gave succour to separatism! That's worse than voting Labour.
    I would have voted for Labour or LDs had they put up candidates for my last 2 but there were no Labour or LD candidates and I had already voted for all the 4 Tory candidates
    Basic rule - never ever vote for the opposition. It might give them that last vote needed in a borderline transferred vote situation.
    It was for Aberystwyth Town Council for goodness sake, not Westminster or even the Senedd or county council and even then I had already voted for every Tory candidate
    So? That's how careers begin. Just think how different things would be if Mr Johnson hadn't become President of the Oxford Union, or Ms Truss a LD committee member.
    Since when was Aberystwyth Town Council the Oxford Union? (Albeit Justine Greening was once an Epping Town Councillor like I was)
    Never. You get an altogether better class of crook in Aber town council.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cicero said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    From the Times,


    Looks like Sunak is interested in breaching the 20% floor.

    HYUFD has made repeated arguments lately that the Tories should go for the REFUK 9% share of the vote.

    Perhaps they'll get it?
    They certainly need to win back much of the 9% RefUK vote.

    At the moment Sunak and Hunt are refusing nurses and teachers even a below inflation pay rise, so that is the public sector vote gone to Labour (and to be fair many of the Cabinet from Barclay to Braverman to Chalk to Keegan think they are wrong on that).

    Sunak is also a Leaver and beyond the Windsor framework for NI is refusing to do anything to soften Boris' Brexit deal so that is the Remainer vote gone to Labour and the LDs.

    Sunak is also not doing much to stop the boats and reduce immigation, so that is seeing hardline redwall Brexiteers go RefUK or even back to Labour.

    Hunt is also refusing to even consider any pre election tax cuts, so that is the Thatcherite on economics vote either staying home or also going RefUK.

    Until inflation and interest rates really start to come down mortgage holders will mostly keep voting Labour having switched from the Tories after the Truss budget.

    So who is still voting Tory? Well mostly Leave voting home owning pensioners who aren't too bothered about immigration and fiscal conservatives working in the private sector who own or nearly own outright their properties and are on a high income and not too affected by cost of living.

    Not much scope for re electing lots of Tory MPs with just them however
    The Tories absolutely do not need to win the fruitcake, nut and loon vote.

    You summarise well why the Tories are struggling, but the solution to that is to smartly try to do well on some of those issues and come across as better than the Opposition.

    The Government seems to have given up. And if they give up and just rely on the racist vote, that will drive away more votes than it wins them.
    The Tories are more likely to win back the 9% voting RefUK than the Remainers voting LD or the redwall voters who only lent them their votes to get Brexit done and now it has done have gone back to Labour.

    Mortgage holders won't come back either until interest rates and inflation are well down from current levels whatever the Tories cultural position
    You're assuming you can just appeal to the bigots and not lose anyone already supporting you, or who could.

    You show a remarkable lack of understanding of the concept of Opportunity Cost. If you go for the racist vote you may get it. But it may be all you get.

    The Tories have no divine right not to lose any more of those who are currently supporting them.
    You are already voting LD or even Starmer Labour so we lost you long ago and you aren't coming back for the next election at least so why should we care what you think at the moment? After all we still got 30-31% and over 150 seats even in 1997 and 2001 when you voted New Labour (not to forget your vote for Farage in the 2019 Euros too)
    The trick of achieving power is to persuade those who may disagree with you on some things to support you nonetheless. Your version of politics seems to be the precise opposite. You seem to want to alienate even previous members of your party, let alone mere voters and supporters, because they lack sufficient loyalty to some nebulous far right cause. Apparently only the right should support the Conservatives, but many RefUK voters will not do so, no matter what, and some of them could even vote for other parties. Centrists that used to support the Conservatives view this ideological arrogance as being about as attractive as the barking of a mad dog.

    In the end you will find that they only person sufficiently loyal is you, and that no one else is interested. The further right the Conservatives swing, the fewer voters will be attracted to them. I mean I am not opposed to this suicidal swing, because I want the Conservatives removed from power for the foreseeable future, but for those who still believe in the brand, the Tories are becoming the revolutionaries that eat their own children.

    The Tories governed successfully from the centre right and arguably their problems have resulted from their steady move away from the centre.

    They fact that this move away from the centre has also involved a move from honesty, probity, decency, and competence is another problem.

    Good afternoon

    Excellent post and it is a sad day when a conservative actively dismisses conservative supporters over decades who simply reject the politics of the right and RefUK

    @HYUFD is a closet RefUK supporter who is in thrall to Johnson, Farage and Trump and parrots their cause whenever be can, while looking rather ridiculous

    He and his like are a Trojan horse ensuring the breakup of the conservative party, and with his often far right little Englander attitude is destined to be as relevant going forward as Corbyn is today

    I was appalled at Jenrick's painting over of the Mickey Mouse cartoon and Braverman and him need removing from any influence on the government

    Of courses @HYUFD response will be I am not a true Tory having voted for Blair previously and likely to vote Lib Dem or even Labour in GE24 as an objection to Robin Millar and his gang of 25 troublemakers

    I would just say that if in 12 months the labour party are looking at a landslide, I do not rule out many former conservative supporters holding their noses and vote for the party to mitigate a labour majority, before entering a period or enforced reflection
    I have never voted for a Farage led party in my life, unlike say Bart.

    Nor have I voted Labour at a general election before, unlike you. I am a loyal Tory who wants the best for my party
    You voted Plaid and your attitude is like putting a blue rosette on a donkey
    I voted for all 4 Tory candidates even on that Town Council ballot paper, I just used all my 6 votes

    You voted Labour twice at a general election over the Tory candidates
    You gave succour to separatism! That's worse than voting Labour.
    I would have voted for Labour or LDs had they put up candidates for my last 2 but there were no Labour or LD candidates and I had already voted for all the 4 Tory candidates
    Basic rule - never ever vote for the opposition. It might give them that last vote needed in a borderline transferred vote situation.
    It was for Aberystwyth Town Council for goodness sake, not Westminster or even the Senedd or county council and even then I had already voted for every Tory candidate
    So? That's how careers begin. Just think how different things would be if Mr Johnson hadn't become President of the Oxford Union, or Ms Truss a LD committee member.
    Since when was Aberystwyth Town Council the Oxford Union? (Albeit Justine Greening was once an Epping Town Councillor like I was)
    Aber is more respectable than the OU: I was just givinbg an example of something patently absurd and trivial which nevertheless grew ...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977

    "The Commons tradition when the PM is away is for the Opposition leader not to take part."

    Seems like a fairly stupid tradition/convention.

    I assume it's something to do with trying to not make the LOTO seem 'lesser' somehow, but questioning a deputy who will just say 'Ask when the boss is back' or something.

    But when PMs might be away for quite a lot of occasions I don't see what is gained by also taking the week off - a PM at least has something else they are doing, what is the LOTO doing on that day?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cicero said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    From the Times,


    Looks like Sunak is interested in breaching the 20% floor.

    HYUFD has made repeated arguments lately that the Tories should go for the REFUK 9% share of the vote.

    Perhaps they'll get it?
    They certainly need to win back much of the 9% RefUK vote.

    At the moment Sunak and Hunt are refusing nurses and teachers even a below inflation pay rise, so that is the public sector vote gone to Labour (and to be fair many of the Cabinet from Barclay to Braverman to Chalk to Keegan think they are wrong on that).

    Sunak is also a Leaver and beyond the Windsor framework for NI is refusing to do anything to soften Boris' Brexit deal so that is the Remainer vote gone to Labour and the LDs.

    Sunak is also not doing much to stop the boats and reduce immigation, so that is seeing hardline redwall Brexiteers go RefUK or even back to Labour.

    Hunt is also refusing to even consider any pre election tax cuts, so that is the Thatcherite on economics vote either staying home or also going RefUK.

    Until inflation and interest rates really start to come down mortgage holders will mostly keep voting Labour having switched from the Tories after the Truss budget.

    So who is still voting Tory? Well mostly Leave voting home owning pensioners who aren't too bothered about immigration and fiscal conservatives working in the private sector who own or nearly own outright their properties and are on a high income and not too affected by cost of living.

    Not much scope for re electing lots of Tory MPs with just them however
    The Tories absolutely do not need to win the fruitcake, nut and loon vote.

    You summarise well why the Tories are struggling, but the solution to that is to smartly try to do well on some of those issues and come across as better than the Opposition.

    The Government seems to have given up. And if they give up and just rely on the racist vote, that will drive away more votes than it wins them.
    The Tories are more likely to win back the 9% voting RefUK than the Remainers voting LD or the redwall voters who only lent them their votes to get Brexit done and now it has done have gone back to Labour.

    Mortgage holders won't come back either until interest rates and inflation are well down from current levels whatever the Tories cultural position
    You're assuming you can just appeal to the bigots and not lose anyone already supporting you, or who could.

    You show a remarkable lack of understanding of the concept of Opportunity Cost. If you go for the racist vote you may get it. But it may be all you get.

    The Tories have no divine right not to lose any more of those who are currently supporting them.
    You are already voting LD or even Starmer Labour so we lost you long ago and you aren't coming back for the next election at least so why should we care what you think at the moment? After all we still got 30-31% and over 150 seats even in 1997 and 2001 when you voted New Labour (not to forget your vote for Farage in the 2019 Euros too)
    The trick of achieving power is to persuade those who may disagree with you on some things to support you nonetheless. Your version of politics seems to be the precise opposite. You seem to want to alienate even previous members of your party, let alone mere voters and supporters, because they lack sufficient loyalty to some nebulous far right cause. Apparently only the right should support the Conservatives, but many RefUK voters will not do so, no matter what, and some of them could even vote for other parties. Centrists that used to support the Conservatives view this ideological arrogance as being about as attractive as the barking of a mad dog.

    In the end you will find that they only person sufficiently loyal is you, and that no one else is interested. The further right the Conservatives swing, the fewer voters will be attracted to them. I mean I am not opposed to this suicidal swing, because I want the Conservatives removed from power for the foreseeable future, but for those who still believe in the brand, the Tories are becoming the revolutionaries that eat their own children.

    The Tories governed successfully from the centre right and arguably their problems have resulted from their steady move away from the centre.

    They fact that this move away from the centre has also involved a move from honesty, probity, decency, and competence is another problem.

    Good afternoon

    Excellent post and it is a sad day when a conservative actively dismisses conservative supporters over decades who simply reject the politics of the right and RefUK

    @HYUFD is a closet RefUK supporter who is in thrall to Johnson, Farage and Trump and parrots their cause whenever be can, while looking rather ridiculous

    He and his like are a Trojan horse ensuring the breakup of the conservative party, and with his often far right little Englander attitude is destined to be as relevant going forward as Corbyn is today

    I was appalled at Jenrick's painting over of the Mickey Mouse cartoon and Braverman and him need removing from any influence on the government

    Of courses @HYUFD response will be I am not a true Tory having voted for Blair previously and likely to vote Lib Dem or even Labour in GE24 as an objection to Robin Millar and his gang of 25 troublemakers

    I would just say that if in 12 months the labour party are looking at a landslide, I do not rule out many former conservative supporters holding their noses and vote for the party to mitigate a labour majority, before entering a period or enforced reflection
    I have never voted for a Farage led party in my life, unlike say Bart.

    Nor have I voted Labour at a general election before, unlike you. I am a loyal Tory who wants the best for my party
    You voted Plaid and your attitude is like putting a blue rosette on a donkey
    I voted for all 4 Tory candidates even on that Town Council ballot paper, I just used all my 6 votes

    You voted Labour twice at a general election over the Tory candidates
    You gave succour to separatism! That's worse than voting Labour.
    Plaid Cymru wasn't separatist at the time. I know that's in theory official party policy now, but in much the same way as privatising the NHS is a goal of the Cornerstone group. Plaid is much looser in its philosophy than any other party, including the SNP.
    Really? They keep that quiet now, with their aping the SNP.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,650

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    edited July 2023
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cicero said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    From the Times,


    Looks like Sunak is interested in breaching the 20% floor.

    HYUFD has made repeated arguments lately that the Tories should go for the REFUK 9% share of the vote.

    Perhaps they'll get it?
    They certainly need to win back much of the 9% RefUK vote.

    At the moment Sunak and Hunt are refusing nurses and teachers even a below inflation pay rise, so that is the public sector vote gone to Labour (and to be fair many of the Cabinet from Barclay to Braverman to Chalk to Keegan think they are wrong on that).

    Sunak is also a Leaver and beyond the Windsor framework for NI is refusing to do anything to soften Boris' Brexit deal so that is the Remainer vote gone to Labour and the LDs.

    Sunak is also not doing much to stop the boats and reduce immigation, so that is seeing hardline redwall Brexiteers go RefUK or even back to Labour.

    Hunt is also refusing to even consider any pre election tax cuts, so that is the Thatcherite on economics vote either staying home or also going RefUK.

    Until inflation and interest rates really start to come down mortgage holders will mostly keep voting Labour having switched from the Tories after the Truss budget.

    So who is still voting Tory? Well mostly Leave voting home owning pensioners who aren't too bothered about immigration and fiscal conservatives working in the private sector who own or nearly own outright their properties and are on a high income and not too affected by cost of living.

    Not much scope for re electing lots of Tory MPs with just them however
    The Tories absolutely do not need to win the fruitcake, nut and loon vote.

    You summarise well why the Tories are struggling, but the solution to that is to smartly try to do well on some of those issues and come across as better than the Opposition.

    The Government seems to have given up. And if they give up and just rely on the racist vote, that will drive away more votes than it wins them.
    The Tories are more likely to win back the 9% voting RefUK than the Remainers voting LD or the redwall voters who only lent them their votes to get Brexit done and now it has done have gone back to Labour.

    Mortgage holders won't come back either until interest rates and inflation are well down from current levels whatever the Tories cultural position
    You're assuming you can just appeal to the bigots and not lose anyone already supporting you, or who could.

    You show a remarkable lack of understanding of the concept of Opportunity Cost. If you go for the racist vote you may get it. But it may be all you get.

    The Tories have no divine right not to lose any more of those who are currently supporting them.
    You are already voting LD or even Starmer Labour so we lost you long ago and you aren't coming back for the next election at least so why should we care what you think at the moment? After all we still got 30-31% and over 150 seats even in 1997 and 2001 when you voted New Labour (not to forget your vote for Farage in the 2019 Euros too)
    The trick of achieving power is to persuade those who may disagree with you on some things to support you nonetheless. Your version of politics seems to be the precise opposite. You seem to want to alienate even previous members of your party, let alone mere voters and supporters, because they lack sufficient loyalty to some nebulous far right cause. Apparently only the right should support the Conservatives, but many RefUK voters will not do so, no matter what, and some of them could even vote for other parties. Centrists that used to support the Conservatives view this ideological arrogance as being about as attractive as the barking of a mad dog.

    In the end you will find that they only person sufficiently loyal is you, and that no one else is interested. The further right the Conservatives swing, the fewer voters will be attracted to them. I mean I am not opposed to this suicidal swing, because I want the Conservatives removed from power for the foreseeable future, but for those who still believe in the brand, the Tories are becoming the revolutionaries that eat their own children.

    The Tories governed successfully from the centre right and arguably their problems have resulted from their steady move away from the centre.

    They fact that this move away from the centre has also involved a move from honesty, probity, decency, and competence is another problem.

    Good afternoon

    Excellent post and it is a sad day when a conservative actively dismisses conservative supporters over decades who simply reject the politics of the right and RefUK

    @HYUFD is a closet RefUK supporter who is in thrall to Johnson, Farage and Trump and parrots their cause whenever be can, while looking rather ridiculous

    He and his like are a Trojan horse ensuring the breakup of the conservative party, and with his often far right little Englander attitude is destined to be as relevant going forward as Corbyn is today

    I was appalled at Jenrick's painting over of the Mickey Mouse cartoon and Braverman and him need removing from any influence on the government

    Of courses @HYUFD response will be I am not a true Tory having voted for Blair previously and likely to vote Lib Dem or even Labour in GE24 as an objection to Robin Millar and his gang of 25 troublemakers

    I would just say that if in 12 months the labour party are looking at a landslide, I do not rule out many former conservative supporters holding their noses and vote for the party to mitigate a labour majority, before entering a period or enforced reflection
    I have never voted for a Farage led party in my life, unlike say Bart.

    Nor have I voted Labour at a general election before, unlike you. I am a loyal Tory who wants the best for my party
    You voted Plaid and your attitude is like putting a blue rosette on a donkey
    I voted for all 4 Tory candidates even on that Town Council ballot paper, I just used all my 6 votes

    You voted Labour twice at a general election over the Tory candidates
    You gave succour to separatism! That's worse than voting Labour.
    Plaid Cymru wasn't separatist at the time. I know that's in theory official party policy now, but in much the same way as privatising the NHS is a goal of the Cornerstone group. Plaid is much looser in its philosophy than any other party, including the SNP.
    Really? They keep that quiet now, with their aping the SNP.
    Plaid is essentially a collection of loose factions mustered around the promotion of Welsh identity. At the moment, the faction obsessed with independence is in the ascendancy, buoyed by events in Scotland and to a lesser extent Northern Ireland. At various other times those groups which regard it as more important to protect and promote Welsh language and culture are ascendant.

    Ultimately, with the exception of a small minority of unreasoning fanatics the Welsh understand there is no realistic way of being divorced from England right now. Scotland could survive such a rupture, albeit with some painful corrections, but not Wales. There is a lot of work and patience needed to make it realistic and there is no politician in Wales - from any party - with the imagination or talent to make it happen. Even though quite a number consider it a desirable end goal, they don't seem to understand or even begin to think about how to achieve it.

    The problem is unreasoning fanatics are noisier and have a simpler message than those who want more Welsh language broadcasting, funding for the Eisteddfod and better road and rail links from north to south.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,551
    edited July 2023

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Belief in Brexit: higher prices and businesses moving abroad. What else?
    Support for homeowners: with mega mortgage rates and the economic disaster that brings?
    Cutting inflation: by increasing inflation?
    "Wokeism": next up on GBeebies, over to Nadine, 30p Lee and Jacob RM to tell us all about it
    Tax Cuts: they're the highest ever in peacetime

    Even your "core values" are a lie. You've done the Exact Opposite of them.
    Keeping the gravy train on the track is now the single core value.

    I despise most politicians but there is a special place in hell for anyone directly associated with the post 2019 Conservative administration.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,022

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,650

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
    I hope so. We need to restore sanity to British politics. We cannot have shysters, grifters and liars taking over and poisoning it for everyone.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    kle4 said:

    "The Commons tradition when the PM is away is for the Opposition leader not to take part."

    Seems like a fairly stupid tradition/convention.

    I assume it's something to do with trying to not make the LOTO seem 'lesser' somehow, but questioning a deputy who will just say 'Ask when the boss is back' or something.

    But when PMs might be away for quite a lot of occasions I don't see what is gained by also taking the week off - a PM at least has something else they are doing, what is the LOTO doing on that day?
    I sort of get that, but what does that say when PMQs still goes ahead anyway? A lesser not-LOTO is questioning a deputy who will just say "ask when the boss is back". Like a bad boxing undercard or something.

    Maybe better convention would be "if the PM is unable to attend then PMQs will be rescheduled to the next available day the House is sitting", or such-like, to accept that sometimes the PM does have bigger fish to fry but also that they can't just duck it because they feel like it.

    Having said that I dunno why I'm complaining because PMQs is just bad theatre to begin with, not good politics/democracy - or certainly now it is, anyway.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Belief in Brexit: higher prices and businesses moving abroad. What else?
    Support for homeowners: with mega mortgage rates and the economic disaster that brings?
    Cutting inflation: by increasing inflation?
    "Wokeism": next up on GBeebies, over to Nadine, 30p Lee and Jacob RM to tell us all about it
    Tax Cuts: they're the highest ever in peacetime

    Even your "core values" are a lie. You've done the Exact Opposite of them.
    Keeping the gravy train on the track is now the single core value.

    I despise most politicians but there is a special place in hell for anyone directly associated with the post 2019 Conservative administration.
    Truss no doubt
    When her time runs out,
    Will ride in a flaming chariot
    Seated in state
    On a red-hot plate
    Twixt Satan and Judas Iscariot.
    Ananias that day
    To Satan will say,
    'My claim for precedence goes.
    So move me up higher - away from the fire
    To make way for that liar of BoJos.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366
    WICKET...danger man Marsh gone.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,572
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    Cicero said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    From the Times,


    Looks like Sunak is interested in breaching the 20% floor.

    HYUFD has made repeated arguments lately that the Tories should go for the REFUK 9% share of the vote.

    Perhaps they'll get it?
    They certainly need to win back much of the 9% RefUK vote.

    At the moment Sunak and Hunt are refusing nurses and teachers even a below inflation pay rise, so that is the public sector vote gone to Labour (and to be fair many of the Cabinet from Barclay to Braverman to Chalk to Keegan think they are wrong on that).

    Sunak is also a Leaver and beyond the Windsor framework for NI is refusing to do anything to soften Boris' Brexit deal so that is the Remainer vote gone to Labour and the LDs.

    Sunak is also not doing much to stop the boats and reduce immigation, so that is seeing hardline redwall Brexiteers go RefUK or even back to Labour.

    Hunt is also refusing to even consider any pre election tax cuts, so that is the Thatcherite on economics vote either staying home or also going RefUK.

    Until inflation and interest rates really start to come down mortgage holders will mostly keep voting Labour having switched from the Tories after the Truss budget.

    So who is still voting Tory? Well mostly Leave voting home owning pensioners who aren't too bothered about immigration and fiscal conservatives working in the private sector who own or nearly own outright their properties and are on a high income and not too affected by cost of living.

    Not much scope for re electing lots of Tory MPs with just them however
    The Tories absolutely do not need to win the fruitcake, nut and loon vote.

    You summarise well why the Tories are struggling, but the solution to that is to smartly try to do well on some of those issues and come across as better than the Opposition.

    The Government seems to have given up. And if they give up and just rely on the racist vote, that will drive away more votes than it wins them.
    The Tories are more likely to win back the 9% voting RefUK than the Remainers voting LD or the redwall voters who only lent them their votes to get Brexit done and now it has done have gone back to Labour.

    Mortgage holders won't come back either until interest rates and inflation are well down from current levels whatever the Tories cultural position
    You're assuming you can just appeal to the bigots and not lose anyone already supporting you, or who could.

    You show a remarkable lack of understanding of the concept of Opportunity Cost. If you go for the racist vote you may get it. But it may be all you get.

    The Tories have no divine right not to lose any more of those who are currently supporting them.
    You are already voting LD or even Starmer Labour so we lost you long ago and you aren't coming back for the next election at least so why should we care what you think at the moment? After all we still got 30-31% and over 150 seats even in 1997 and 2001 when you voted New Labour (not to forget your vote for Farage in the 2019 Euros too)
    The trick of achieving power is to persuade those who may disagree with you on some things to support you nonetheless. Your version of politics seems to be the precise opposite. You seem to want to alienate even previous members of your party, let alone mere voters and supporters, because they lack sufficient loyalty to some nebulous far right cause. Apparently only the right should support the Conservatives, but many RefUK voters will not do so, no matter what, and some of them could even vote for other parties. Centrists that used to support the Conservatives view this ideological arrogance as being about as attractive as the barking of a mad dog.

    In the end you will find that they only person sufficiently loyal is you, and that no one else is interested. The further right the Conservatives swing, the fewer voters will be attracted to them. I mean I am not opposed to this suicidal swing, because I want the Conservatives removed from power for the foreseeable future, but for those who still believe in the brand, the Tories are becoming the revolutionaries that eat their own children.

    The Tories governed successfully from the centre right and arguably their problems have resulted from their steady move away from the centre.

    They fact that this move away from the centre has also involved a move from honesty, probity, decency, and competence is another problem.

    Good afternoon

    Excellent post and it is a sad day when a conservative actively dismisses conservative supporters over decades who simply reject the politics of the right and RefUK

    @HYUFD is a closet RefUK supporter who is in thrall to Johnson, Farage and Trump and parrots their cause whenever be can, while looking rather ridiculous

    He and his like are a Trojan horse ensuring the breakup of the conservative party, and with his often far right little Englander attitude is destined to be as relevant going forward as Corbyn is today

    I was appalled at Jenrick's painting over of the Mickey Mouse cartoon and Braverman and him need removing from any influence on the government

    Of courses @HYUFD response will be I am not a true Tory having voted for Blair previously and likely to vote Lib Dem or even Labour in GE24 as an objection to Robin Millar and his gang of 25 troublemakers

    I would just say that if in 12 months the labour party are looking at a landslide, I do not rule out many former conservative supporters holding their noses and vote for the party to mitigate a labour majority, before entering a period or enforced reflection
    I have never voted for a Farage led party in my life, unlike say Bart.

    Nor have I voted Labour at a general election before, unlike you. I am a loyal Tory who wants the best for my party
    You voted Plaid and your attitude is like putting a blue rosette on a donkey
    I voted for all 4 Tory candidates even on that Town Council ballot paper, I just used all my 6 votes

    You voted Labour twice at a general election over the Tory candidates
    You gave succour to separatism! That's worse than voting Labour.
    Plaid Cymru wasn't separatist at the time. I know that's in theory official party policy now, but in much the same way as privatising the NHS is a goal of the Cornerstone group. Plaid is much looser in its philosophy than any other party, including the SNP.
    It is nevertheless what our HY will always be known for, regardless of other achievements past or future. Rather like the talented Irishman who could have been known as Paddy the Boatbuilder or Paddy the Furniture Maker, but made the mistake of f***ing just one goat….
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,420
    A

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
    I hope so. We need to restore sanity to British politics. We cannot have shysters, grifters and liars taking over and poisoning it for everyone.
    Said Lord North, probably.

    Cromwell said it, for sure…

    Poor old Magna Carta was an attempt at reforming the body politic as well.

    Who was it who said that Cato talked as if he was in Plato’s Athens, not among the dregs of Rome?

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 50,605

    WICKET...danger man Marsh gone.

    The wokes are on the march.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    edited July 2023

    A

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
    I hope so. We need to restore sanity to British politics. We cannot have shysters, grifters and liars taking over and poisoning it for everyone.
    Said Lord North, probably.

    Cromwell said it, for sure…

    Poor old Magna Carta was an attempt at reforming the body politic as well.

    Who was it who said that Cato talked as if he was in Plato’s Athens, not among the dregs of Rome?

    Ooh, hadn't come across that. Didn't take long to find it - Cicero. Edit: but I can't see RP declaiming at the end of every post on PB: Eppingia delenda est.


    “You don’t love Cato more than I do. But, though he has the best intentions and is quite the patriot, he nevertheless on occasion does some harm to the republic, because he speaks as though he lived in Plato’s Republic, and not among the dregs of Romulus.”



    nam Catonem nostrum non tu amas plus quam ego; sed tamen ille optimo animo utens et summa fide nocet interdum rei publicae; dicit enim tamquam in Platonis πολιτείᾳ , non tamquam in Romuli faece sententiam.

    https://sententiaeantiquae.com/2014/11/13/cato-the-political-idealist-ciceros-letters-to-atticus-2-1-8/
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    Cyclefree said:

    Sandpit said:

    ...

    From the Times,


    Looks like Sunak is interested in breaching the 20% floor.

    It might be a cheap, below the belt shot, but if it gains traction despite being false, it could destroy Starmer.

    If winning at any cost to keep the gravy train rolling is the aim. Why not?
    Lawyers think it’s a low blow, but everyone else says well, he was actually in charge of the organisation that made the decision.

    I’d rather the Tories didn’t go there though. We see from the States, where negative campaigning gets us, way more heat than light.
    If the Tories were really interested in doing something about child abuse, they'd implement IICSA's recommendations instead of making spurious accusations against Starmer. But no - child abuse is something to be used for campaigning purposes rather than a hideous crime we should all be doing our utmost to try and prevent and protect our children. Quite shameful.
    Or indeed, making sure their own agencies followed basic safeguarding protocols.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366

    WICKET...danger man Marsh gone.

    The wokes are on the march.
    I don't understand Woakes bowling a load of short stuff, when errhh there is a 95mph bowler scratching his arse....and the conditions are set for swing which is what Woakes strength is.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,759
    Farooq said:

    Sean_F said:

    Farooq said:

    Leon said:

    Farooq said:

    "This country isn't racist"
    vs
    "I'm desperately afraid of being outnumbered by Black people"

    These two views can, apparently, coexist in one mind.

    If an Afghan said “I’m not racist but I’d rather my country didn’t become majority white and Christian, unless the Afghan people approve of it in a vote” you wouldn’t accuse them of hypocrisy. Yet for white British people it is unacceptable to say this?

    Lefties are ridiculous twats, part 297
    I wouldn't accuse them of hypocrisy, I'd accuse them of having a racially discriminatory attitude to whom they want as having their neighbours.

    I mean, even the word "accuse" is a bit unnecessary because it's exactly what "they" would be saying.

    I really don't understand what would motivate someone to be so concerned about ensuring the majority of people around them have the same colour skin. Still, I guess it's probably not because they're racist, it must be for some other reasons 🤷
    Changes in demography often (not always) mean changes in the balance of political and/or religious power.

    A devoutly Muslim Afghan would have every reason to fear that an influx of white people would mean that Afghanistan would cease to be a devoutly Muslim country.

    In other parts of the world, growth in the size of a minority group may lead the current majority group to fear that they will cease to be the dominant political group.

    You may not agree with that outlook, but there is nothing irrational about it.
    So.. preserving the racial makeup of a society is rational?
    From the POV of the currently dominant group, entirely so.

    The dominant group might fear that if it slips to minority status, it will be subject to a government that is bent upon redistributing wealth to the formerly minority group, and removing its cultural landmarks.

    Ethnic conflict is unpleasant. It's rarely irrational.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,369
    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,135

    WICKET...danger man Marsh gone.

    The wokes are on the march.
    I don't understand Woakes bowling a load of short stuff, when errhh there is a 95mph bowler scratching his arse....and the conditions are set for swing which is what Woakes strength is.
    So get Wood before giving Head a chance to get in?
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,759

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
    I hope so. We need to restore sanity to British politics. We cannot have shysters, grifters and liars taking over and poisoning it for everyone.
    I suspect that ship has sailed.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    edited July 2023
    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
    I hope so. We need to restore sanity to British politics. We cannot have shysters, grifters and liars taking over and poisoning it for everyone.
    I suspect that ship has sailed.
    That ship has sailed, unshipped its cargo, dry docked for repair and is halfway through its next voyage.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,314

    WICKET...danger man Marsh gone.

    The wokes are on the march.
    I don't understand Woakes bowling a load of short stuff, when errhh there is a 95mph bowler scratching his arse....and the conditions are set for swing which is what Woakes strength is.
    So get Wood before giving Head a chance to get in?
    If you want to give Head, you have to get Wood first.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,135
    Sandpit said:

    WICKET...danger man Marsh gone.

    The wokes are on the march.
    I don't understand Woakes bowling a load of short stuff, when errhh there is a 95mph bowler scratching his arse....and the conditions are set for swing which is what Woakes strength is.
    So get Wood before giving Head a chance to get in?
    If you want to give Head, you have to get Wood first.
    Maybe they should find a broad to give Head.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,369
    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    That should have read “spads” not spades although maybe the PM will need a spade to dig the Tories out of the mess they are in.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    The short ball tactics are mad, but they have worked so far.

    Australia still giving off Head though.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,022
    This test is getting interesting
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366

    This test is getting interesting

    Its the hope that kills you.....
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    boulay said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    That should have read “spads” not spades although maybe the PM will need a spade to dig the Tories out of the mess they are in.
    The spades might be for digging the hole to bury the folders in!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,314
    Howzat!
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    boulay said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    That should have read “spads” not spades although maybe the PM will need a spade to dig the Tories out of the mess they are in.
    More like shovel the shite he wants to scatter.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 22,135
    ydoethur said:

    The short ball tactics are mad, but they have worked so far.

    Australia still giving off Head though.

    This generation have rarely faced sustained short ball tactics, so not surprising they are not great at facing it.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,753
    The most bizarre thing about this website (and there is a lot of competition) is the way how HYUFD voted in a Welsh local election some years ago. Apart from obviously being boring to nearly everyone ,it marks the ones that bring it up as oddly obsessive .
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366
    edited July 2023

    The most bizarre thing about this website (and there is a lot of competition) is the way how HYUFD voted in a Welsh local election some years ago. Apart from obviously being boring to nearly everyone ,it marks the ones that bring it up as oddly obsessive .

    It only comes out when HYUFD start to attack other natural Conservative supporters as impure because they once voted for another party.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,327
    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
    I hope so. We need to restore sanity to British politics. We cannot have shysters, grifters and liars taking over and poisoning it for everyone.
    I suspect that ship has sailed.
    That ship has sailed, unshipped its cargo, dry docked for repair and is halfway through its next voyage.
    Its had long enough for the Scottish government to get it in the water.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366
    edited July 2023
    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    I wouldn't say we get any more light versus heat from the Liaison Committee session, it still a lot of partisan nonsense most of the time.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366
    edited July 2023
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    The media love it as well, because at its best it results in a gotcha which they can use to drive their coverage for the next few days.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
    I hope so. We need to restore sanity to British politics. We cannot have shysters, grifters and liars taking over and poisoning it for everyone.
    I suspect that ship has sailed.
    That ship has sailed, unshipped its cargo, dry docked for repair and is halfway through its next voyage.
    Its had long enough for the Scottish government to get it in the water.
    Now don't be silly.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    I wouldn't say we get any more light versus heat from the Liaison Committee session, it still a lot of partisan nonsense most of the time.
    Sure, but it has more potential by virtue of a longer session, chance to have more briefing materials, and without rando MPs trying to score a viral moment or suck up to the PM in particularly egregious fashion.

    If we're trying to turn either PMQs or Liaison Committee into something useful the latter is probably easier.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,650

    The most bizarre thing about this website (and there is a lot of competition) is the way how HYUFD voted in a Welsh local election some years ago. Apart from obviously being boring to nearly everyone ,it marks the ones that bring it up as oddly obsessive .

    Its baiting a massive hypocrite. If he stopped being holier-than-thou and denouncing every other Tory as not being as pure as him, we'll stop reminding him he he voted for Plaid.

    Its not how he voted that is relevant, just that he is a gargantuan hypocrite.
  • state_go_awaystate_go_away Posts: 5,753

    The most bizarre thing about this website (and there is a lot of competition) is the way how HYUFD voted in a Welsh local election some years ago. Apart from obviously being boring to nearly everyone ,it marks the ones that bring it up as oddly obsessive .

    Its baiting a massive hypocrite. If he stopped being holier-than-thou and denouncing every other Tory as not being as pure as him, we'll stop reminding him he he voted for Plaid.

    Its not how he voted that is relevant, just that he is a gargantuan hypocrite.
    Are not we all somewhat? As I say its boring and obsessive - get over it
  • MiklosvarMiklosvar Posts: 1,855
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    I don't see why that would happen, short of a party running on a core manifesto commitment to stamp out arseholery at PMQ. Even then you run into the boring old dilemma of how to limit freedom of speech without the horrible side effect of freedom of speech being limited which is kind of especially crucial in Parliament.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    At the very least the Speaker should crack down on obvious non-answers, evasions and quite-obviously-changing-the-subject-to-turn-it-back-to-the-questioner responses.

    Otherwise we might as well just get them to have a fight in the pub car park.
  • Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 62,022

    The most bizarre thing about this website (and there is a lot of competition) is the way how HYUFD voted in a Welsh local election some years ago. Apart from obviously being boring to nearly everyone ,it marks the ones that bring it up as oddly obsessive .

    He makes a huge point of loyalty and attacks those of us who may on a couple of times not have voted conservative, if my case in over 60 years.

    It is quite amusing
  • MiklosvarMiklosvar Posts: 1,855
    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    You just invented the liaison committee.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,274
    WaPo (via Seattle Times) - House Freedom Caucus votes to oust conservative Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene

    The hard-right House Freedom Caucus voted to remove Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), a conservative rabble-rouser who in recent months allied herself with House Speaker McCarthy (R-Calif.), following a spat with another member of the group, according to a person familiar with the meeting.

    The vote took place on June 23, shortly before Congress went on recess late last month, but the Freedom Caucus has not publicly disclosed the outcome, citing a policy of not commenting on membership. . . .

    “My America First credentials, guided by my Christian faith, are forged in steel, seared in my character, and will never change,” Greene said, adding that she will work with “anyone” who shares her priorities. Greene’s office did not immediately respond to a question about her status with the Freedom Caucus.

    Greene told Breitbart News, “That meeting was an impromptu meeting. Most of the Freedom Caucus was not there to my understanding.” She went on to tell Breitbart that she has not spoken with caucus Chairman Scott Perry (R-Pa.), but she planned to discuss things with him in person when Congress returns from recess next week.

    Many in the far-right group had begun to grow uncomfortable with Greene’s participation after she threw her full support behind McCarthy earlier this year. . . .

    Members of the Freedom Caucus also were irked when Greene confronted Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) on the House floor and reportedly called her a “little (expletive)” after Boebert introduced a privileged resolution to impeach Biden, forcing the House to consider the motion within two days. . . .

    Greene did not hide her annoyance with Boebert earlier that week, telling reporters that the Colorado congresswoman had copied her impeachment articles against Biden and just attached it to a provision that would fast-track its consideration. Both women were elected in 2020 to the House and have not gotten along since then, according to multiple Republican lawmakers. . . .

    Greene has been no stranger to controversy even before her first election to Congress in 2020.

    In February 2021, Democrats and 11 Republicans voted to strip Greene from two committees for past social media posts, including falsely claiming that some mass shootings were “false flag” attacks meant to curb Second Amendment rights; that the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks were a government conspiracy; and that a Jewish cabal had used space lasers to ignite a deadly California wildfire. She also came under scrutiny for a slew of antisemitic, Islamophobic and racist views she expressed before joining Congress.

    The following February, Greene prompted renewed criticism when she appeared at a conference in Orlando organized by Nick Fuentes, a white supremacist and antisemite.

    SSI - Speaks volumes, when Wack-job like MTG gets expelled from "Freedom Caucus" for her libtard RHINOism.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240
    Sitting on a train back from the Chilterns to Euston (beautiful picnic)

    My older daughter is reading a biography of Siegfried Sassoon: War Poet

    About 3 months ago - or so it seems - I was reading to her The Giant Jam Sandwich

    Sigh
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,327

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    The media love it as well, because at its best it results in a gotcha which they can use to drive their coverage for the next few days.
    What I find bizarre is the people who still think PMQs has something to do with the answers. It is the questions that shape it, at least in the hands of a skilled operator like Blair or Cameron. You make the PM not answer the question, then you give him the answer and move on. Its a while since we have seen it done really well. Ed Miliband had his moments but not nearly enough.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,274

    The most bizarre thing about this website (and there is a lot of competition) is the way how HYUFD voted in a Welsh local election some years ago. Apart from obviously being boring to nearly everyone ,it marks the ones that bring it up as oddly obsessive .

    Its baiting a massive hypocrite. If he stopped being holier-than-thou and denouncing every other Tory as not being as pure as him, we'll stop reminding him he he voted for Plaid.

    Its not how he voted that is relevant, just that he is a gargantuan hypocrite.
    Are not we all somewhat? As I say its boring and obsessive - get over it
    Less-than-rousing (or persuasive) "defense" of PB's (and Conservative Party's) very own Vicar of Bray.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 41,258
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    Maybe but I hate it now. Perhaps I've grown up at last.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    Miklosvar said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    I don't see why that would happen, short of a party running on a core manifesto commitment to stamp out arseholery at PMQ. Even then you run into the boring old dilemma of how to limit freedom of speech without the horrible side effect of freedom of speech being limited which is kind of especially crucial in Parliament.
    I don't mean that you bring in a rule about it. They already have rules around disorder etc, which are even enforced whenever the Speaker brings them back to order.

    I mean that if the public were seriously miffed about how their leaders acted at PMQs it would not be popular or effective to act in the rowdy fashion they currently do, and they'd modulate their behaviour voluntarily.

    They don't, because most people don't really mind it.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366
    edited July 2023
    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    The media love it as well, because at its best it results in a gotcha which they can use to drive their coverage for the next few days.
    What I find bizarre is the people who still think PMQs has something to do with the answers. It is the questions that shape it, at least in the hands of a skilled operator like Blair or Cameron. You make the PM not answer the question, then you give him the answer and move on. Its a while since we have seen it done really well. Ed Miliband had his moments but not nearly enough.
    Were you not entertained by finding out Maureen from Margate had written to Jezza every week ;-)
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,369
    Miklosvar said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    You just invented the liaison committee.
    I know it’s “like” the liaison committee but the LC isn’t the leaders of each party questioning the PM. You would still get your sound bites for TV etc but without some backbenchers risking a heart attack shouting and booing after a boozy brunch.

    You keep the format of number of questions based on party seat numbers and a few randoms selected by the speaker - might just get some more constructive Q&As.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,040

    The most bizarre thing about this website (and there is a lot of competition) is the way how HYUFD voted in a Welsh local election some years ago. Apart from obviously being boring to nearly everyone ,it marks the ones that bring it up as oddly obsessive .

    Its baiting a massive hypocrite. If he stopped being holier-than-thou and denouncing every other Tory as not being as pure as him, we'll stop reminding him he he voted for Plaid.

    Its not how he voted that is relevant, just that he is a gargantuan hypocrite.
    Be fair, RP (and everyone else). We’ve all done things as students which, as adults, we rather not be reminded of. And we wouldn’t know if our colleague hadn’t told us himself.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,274
    boulay said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    That should have read “spads” not spades although maybe the PM will need a spade to dig the Tories out of the mess they are in.
    Glad you made that correction. ESPECIALLY as in (now rather antique) American slang, "spade" means NOT just a type of shovel, but also someone of African heritage.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,762
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    When has any party stood with abolishing pmq's in their manifesto. Oh right they haven't so where is the pressure not to. Politicians only care what anyone thinks every half decade.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,327

    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    The media love it as well, because at its best it results in a gotcha which they can use to drive their coverage for the next few days.
    What I find bizarre is the people who still think PMQs has something to do with the answers. It is the questions that shape it, at least in the hands of a skilled operator like Blair or Cameron. You make the PM not answer the question, then you give him the answer and move on. Its a while since we have seen it done really well. Ed Miliband had his moments but not nearly enough.
    Were you not entertained by finding out Maureen from Margate had written to Jezza every week ;-)
    No.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,369

    boulay said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    That should have read “spads” not spades although maybe the PM will need a spade to dig the Tories out of the mess they are in.
    Glad you made that correction. ESPECIALLY as in (now rather antique) American slang, "spade" means NOT just a type of shovel, but also someone of African heritage.
    Indeed, I wasn’t going for the whole blazing saddles liberal use of racial epithets but thought I would correct just in case.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,420
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
    I hope so. We need to restore sanity to British politics. We cannot have shysters, grifters and liars taking over and poisoning it for everyone.
    I suspect that ship has sailed.
    That ship has sailed, unshipped its cargo, dry docked for repair and is halfway through its next voyage.
    Its had long enough for the Scottish government to get it in the water.
    Don’t exaggerate. Enough time has past for the Scottish government to select the first rivet. For an all welded ship.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    kinabalu said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    Maybe but I hate it now. Perhaps I've grown up at last.
    As a political anorak I don't bother to watch it. I think it's designed for media figures and the public who tune into political news once in a blue moon. Otherwise it's just irritating and pointless.
  • solarflaresolarflare Posts: 3,705
    kle4 said:

    Miklosvar said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    I don't see why that would happen, short of a party running on a core manifesto commitment to stamp out arseholery at PMQ. Even then you run into the boring old dilemma of how to limit freedom of speech without the horrible side effect of freedom of speech being limited which is kind of especially crucial in Parliament.
    I don't mean that you bring in a rule about it. They already have rules around disorder etc, which are even enforced whenever the Speaker brings them back to order.

    I mean that if the public were seriously miffed about how their leaders acted at PMQs it would not be popular or effective to act in the rowdy fashion they currently do, and they'd modulate their behaviour voluntarily.

    They don't, because most people don't really mind it.
    Most people don't give a flying fuck about it. We're not talking about Love Island or live sport or whatever here.

    You've got to be reasonably interested in politics to watch PMQs, in which case I suspect you actually want some reasonable semi-civilised debate about it.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,327

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
    I hope so. We need to restore sanity to British politics. We cannot have shysters, grifters and liars taking over and poisoning it for everyone.
    I suspect that ship has sailed.
    That ship has sailed, unshipped its cargo, dry docked for repair and is halfway through its next voyage.
    Its had long enough for the Scottish government to get it in the water.
    Don’t exaggerate. Enough time has past for the Scottish government to select the first rivet. For an all welded ship.
    Those longboats will be online and serving the isles any month now.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240
    Do we have any British wildlife experts here?

    During my hike today with my kiddo - the Ashridge Estate in the Chilterns - I am 98% sure I saw a wild boar. I only glimpsed the back half, but the profile is so distinctive, as is the small frisky tail and the way it swishes

    It was, I am sure, a boar. Not a a dog or a small cow or a black sheep. Certainly not a deer. I’ve seen boar before (abroad) and I know the signs

    Yet online I can only find one or two tiny references to boar POSSIBLY in the Chilterns. I know the species is expanding. Maybe I saw a pioneer?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977

    kle4 said:

    Miklosvar said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    I don't see why that would happen, short of a party running on a core manifesto commitment to stamp out arseholery at PMQ. Even then you run into the boring old dilemma of how to limit freedom of speech without the horrible side effect of freedom of speech being limited which is kind of especially crucial in Parliament.
    I don't mean that you bring in a rule about it. They already have rules around disorder etc, which are even enforced whenever the Speaker brings them back to order.

    I mean that if the public were seriously miffed about how their leaders acted at PMQs it would not be popular or effective to act in the rowdy fashion they currently do, and they'd modulate their behaviour voluntarily.

    They don't, because most people don't really mind it.
    Most people don't give a flying fuck about it. We're not talking about Love Island or live sport or whatever here.

    You've got to be reasonably interested in politics to watch PMQs, in which case I suspect you actually want some reasonable semi-civilised debate about it.
    I think it's the other way round actually - PMQs is for people who are not generally interested in politics but are tuning in on a particular occasion, hence why it is more exaggerated, boisterous, and slapstick.

    You see it sometimes in local councils, where the various committees etc are very colleagiate and civil, national politics is irrelevant, but at their Full Council meetings they

    (This doesn't apply to closely contested councils, which are more likely to be combative in the first place)
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,327
    The wicket seems to have died a bit and these 2 are putting on dangerous runs.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,420
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Sean_F said:

    HYUFD said:

    What boggles the mind with the Reverend @HYUFD is that he pompously preaches from his pulpit about how holier-than-thou he is. Yet when it comes to politics morality goes out the window. No consideration of right and wrong. Of basic human decency. No.

    For the good Reverend literally anything goes. Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, he'd do anything to anything if there was a vote in it.

    So what is the point in the Conservative Party as envisaged by the Rev HYUFD if it believes in nothing but survival? There are no values. No beliefs. No philosophy. A black hole.

    No, the Conservatives core values now are belief in Brexit, support for home owners and inherited wealth, cutting inflation, opposing ultra wokeism and ideally tax cuts but only once inflation is down
    Your core values, others are available including honesty, integrity and decency which have been utterly lacking from Johnson
    Surely there is nothing wrong for someone piously screech on about morality whilst supporting immorality. Are you trying to claim there is some hypocrisy? Surely not...
    I support the Conservative party of old and will fight to get it back to core values

    It may well be a forlorn hope, but then every party has its own issues on these matters
    I hope so. We need to restore sanity to British politics. We cannot have shysters, grifters and liars taking over and poisoning it for everyone.
    I suspect that ship has sailed.
    That ship has sailed, unshipped its cargo, dry docked for repair and is halfway through its next voyage.
    Its had long enough for the Scottish government to get it in the water.
    Don’t exaggerate. Enough time has past for the Scottish government to select the first rivet. For an all welded ship.
    Those longboats will be online and serving the isles any month now.
    Longboats? You’re getting longboats?!??

    LUuuuuuuxuuury!

    {prybars open a double case of Chateaux De Chasseliers}

    ….
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,528
    Leon said:

    Do we have any British wildlife experts here?

    During my hike today with my kiddo - the Ashridge Estate in the Chilterns - I am 98% sure I saw a wild boar. I only glimpsed the back half, but the profile is so distinctive, as is the small frisky tail and the way it swishes

    It was, I am sure, a boar. Not a a dog or a small cow or a black sheep. Certainly not a deer. I’ve seen boar before (abroad) and I know the signs

    Yet online I can only find one or two tiny references to boar POSSIBLY in the Chilterns. I know the species is expanding. Maybe I saw a pioneer?

    Perhaps it was SKS from the rear

    Oh,  . . .  boar, sorry

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    DavidL said:

    The wicket seems to have died a bit and these 2 are putting on dangerous runs.

    Anything over 200 is a struggle on this wicket.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,040
    Leon said:

    Do we have any British wildlife experts here?

    During my hike today with my kiddo - the Ashridge Estate in the Chilterns - I am 98% sure I saw a wild boar. I only glimpsed the back half, but the profile is so distinctive, as is the small frisky tail and the way it swishes

    It was, I am sure, a boar. Not a a dog or a small cow or a black sheep. Certainly not a deer. I’ve seen boar before (abroad) and I know the signs

    Yet online I can only find one or two tiny references to boar POSSIBLY in the Chilterns. I know the species is expanding. Maybe I saw a pioneer?

    They’ve been released in the Forest of Dean, AIUI. It’s not that far away.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 48,420
    Leon said:

    Do we have any British wildlife experts here?

    During my hike today with my kiddo - the Ashridge Estate in the Chilterns - I am 98% sure I saw a wild boar. I only glimpsed the back half, but the profile is so distinctive, as is the small frisky tail and the way it swishes

    It was, I am sure, a boar. Not a a dog or a small cow or a black sheep. Certainly not a deer. I’ve seen boar before (abroad) and I know the signs

    Yet online I can only find one or two tiny references to boar POSSIBLY in the Chilterns. I know the species is expanding. Maybe I saw a pioneer?

    Perfectly possible - they are escaping all the time.

    Still remember the panic the police got themselves into in Wiltshire, way back, when wild boar escapes were a newish thing. They ended up trying to beg guns off a local hunting type.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627

    Leon said:

    Do we have any British wildlife experts here?

    During my hike today with my kiddo - the Ashridge Estate in the Chilterns - I am 98% sure I saw a wild boar. I only glimpsed the back half, but the profile is so distinctive, as is the small frisky tail and the way it swishes

    It was, I am sure, a boar. Not a a dog or a small cow or a black sheep. Certainly not a deer. I’ve seen boar before (abroad) and I know the signs

    Yet online I can only find one or two tiny references to boar POSSIBLY in the Chilterns. I know the species is expanding. Maybe I saw a pioneer?

    They’ve been released in the Forest of Dean, AIUI. It’s not that far away.
    Huh?
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,528

    Leon said:

    Do we have any British wildlife experts here?

    During my hike today with my kiddo - the Ashridge Estate in the Chilterns - I am 98% sure I saw a wild boar. I only glimpsed the back half, but the profile is so distinctive, as is the small frisky tail and the way it swishes

    It was, I am sure, a boar. Not a a dog or a small cow or a black sheep. Certainly not a deer. I’ve seen boar before (abroad) and I know the signs

    Yet online I can only find one or two tiny references to boar POSSIBLY in the Chilterns. I know the species is expanding. Maybe I saw a pioneer?

    They’ve been released in the Forest of Dean, AIUI. It’s not that far away.
    Maybe they've had all the acorns there and have moved on
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,084
    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    That is what the Liaison Committee does. Here is a 90-minute video of Rishi answering questions at the Liaison Committee last Tuesday.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A12iC0R9ej8
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    DavidL said:

    The wicket seems to have died a bit and these 2 are putting on dangerous runs.

    You still have it.

    But now for Cummins...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,314
    edited July 2023
    DavidL said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    The media love it as well, because at its best it results in a gotcha which they can use to drive their coverage for the next few days.
    What I find bizarre is the people who still think PMQs has something to do with the answers. It is the questions that shape it, at least in the hands of a skilled operator like Blair or Cameron. You make the PM not answer the question, then you give him the answer and move on. Its a while since we have seen it done really well. Ed Miliband had his moments but not nearly enough.
    William Hague was great at skewering Blair at PMQs. Fat lot of good it did him at the 2001 election.
  • CatManCatMan Posts: 3,019
    ydoethur said:

    DavidL said:

    The wicket seems to have died a bit and these 2 are putting on dangerous runs.

    You still have it.

    But now for Cummins...
    Foakes would have caught that...
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 53,314
    Great catch!
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,274
    Leon said:

    Do we have any British wildlife experts here?

    During my hike today with my kiddo - the Ashridge Estate in the Chilterns - I am 98% sure I saw a wild boar. I only glimpsed the back half, but the profile is so distinctive, as is the small frisky tail and the way it swishes

    It was, I am sure, a boar. Not a a dog or a small cow or a black sheep. Certainly not a deer. I’ve seen boar before (abroad) and I know the signs

    Yet online I can only find one or two tiny references to boar POSSIBLY in the Chilterns. I know the species is expanding. Maybe I saw a pioneer?

    Root hog or die!

    Bobby Horton - Homespun Songs of the Confederacy - Root Hog or Die
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1uy_9Wvuc8Y

    (No doubt popular for MAGA-maniac karaoke.)
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240

    Leon said:

    Do we have any British wildlife experts here?

    During my hike today with my kiddo - the Ashridge Estate in the Chilterns - I am 98% sure I saw a wild boar. I only glimpsed the back half, but the profile is so distinctive, as is the small frisky tail and the way it swishes

    It was, I am sure, a boar. Not a a dog or a small cow or a black sheep. Certainly not a deer. I’ve seen boar before (abroad) and I know the signs

    Yet online I can only find one or two tiny references to boar POSSIBLY in the Chilterns. I know the species is expanding. Maybe I saw a pioneer?

    Perfectly possible - they are escaping all the time.

    Still remember the panic the police got themselves into in Wiltshire, way back, when wild boar escapes were a newish thing. They ended up trying to beg guns off a local hunting type.
    Looks very possible. I’m not alone

    “Large adult boar spotted running down the road on the A509 in North Bucks.”

    https://twitter.com/wildboar_uk/status/1592833152263020544?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    How exciting! I hope they spread everywhere. Proper wild animals with a bit of edge
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,084
    kle4 said:

    Miklosvar said:

    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    It's a nice idea, but that's what the Liaison Committee sessions are supposed to be for I suppose. Everyone knows that PMQs is about the theatre, and that benefits government and opposition, so they don't want or need more (backbenchers might disagree, they aren't on the committee, but who cares about them?)

    They should make Ministerial attendance at select committees much more frequent, and they should not get the opportunity to beg off.
    PMQs can still be theatre without the stupid braying, which just makes everyone in politics look like either a moron or an areshole, or indeed both.
    I maintain that's what the public wants from it. If they didn't, then there would be pressure on them to stop, and they would do so eventually. People have said the same things about it my entire adult life, and it's not changed at all.

    I think people like criticising it, but also like to see their side ripping in to the other.
    I don't see why that would happen, short of a party running on a core manifesto commitment to stamp out arseholery at PMQ. Even then you run into the boring old dilemma of how to limit freedom of speech without the horrible side effect of freedom of speech being limited which is kind of especially crucial in Parliament.
    I don't mean that you bring in a rule about it. They already have rules around disorder etc, which are even enforced whenever the Speaker brings them back to order.

    I mean that if the public were seriously miffed about how their leaders acted at PMQs it would not be popular or effective to act in the rowdy fashion they currently do, and they'd modulate their behaviour voluntarily.

    They don't, because most people don't really mind it.
    Coordinated barracking at PMQs is mainly a Conservative tactic that started in the 1970s under Mrs Thatcher. Recently Tory whips stopped it for a while under Boris (and possibly Theresa May) because it was creating more problems for the Prime Minister than the Leader of the Opposition.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240
    “Another sighting nr the Chilterns. "I saw a large brown animal emerge from a hedge. It saw me and dashed straight back where it had come from. The animal was headed for the river but ran back into the hedge. It was exactly the right colour, the shape of the head was right too".

    https://twitter.com/wildboar_uk/status/950319385314553857?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,327
    DavidL said:

    The wicket seems to have died a bit and these 2 are putting on dangerous runs.

    snigger.
  • MiklosvarMiklosvar Posts: 1,855

    boulay said:

    boulay said:

    Having just noticed the title of the thread, maybe they should change PMQs to a committee setting.

    PM sits there at a desk with a couple of spades and his folders. The other party leaders in a horseshoe and the MPs selected by the speaker to ask questions.

    Session lasts an hour. Stops the bullshit braying and football type cheers and jeers and you might just get more detailed and useful answers.

    That should have read “spads” not spades although maybe the PM will need a spade to dig the Tories out of the mess they are in.
    Glad you made that correction. ESPECIALLY as in (now rather antique) American slang, "spade" means NOT just a type of shovel, but also someone of African heritage.
    It's British English too (as in b..ck as the ace of). The first novel,in the Absolute Beginners trilogy is called City of Spades. See also Mott the Hoople, All The Way From Memphis

    Well I got to Oreoles y'know - it took a month
    And there was my guitar, electric junk.
    Some spade said "Rock'n'rollers, you're all the same.
    Man that's your instrument." I felt so ashamed.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The wicket seems to have died a bit and these 2 are putting on dangerous runs.

    snigger.
    Head's playing the innings of his life though. Pure doggedness.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,962
    I think Starmer is mainly using PMQs to road test his messages. See which ones cut through and how his opponents will attack him. He doesn't seem particularly interested in winning on points.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,369
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Do we have any British wildlife experts here?

    During my hike today with my kiddo - the Ashridge Estate in the Chilterns - I am 98% sure I saw a wild boar. I only glimpsed the back half, but the profile is so distinctive, as is the small frisky tail and the way it swishes

    It was, I am sure, a boar. Not a a dog or a small cow or a black sheep. Certainly not a deer. I’ve seen boar before (abroad) and I know the signs

    Yet online I can only find one or two tiny references to boar POSSIBLY in the Chilterns. I know the species is expanding. Maybe I saw a pioneer?

    Perfectly possible - they are escaping all the time.

    Still remember the panic the police got themselves into in Wiltshire, way back, when wild boar escapes were a newish thing. They ended up trying to beg guns off a local hunting type.
    Looks very possible. I’m not alone

    “Large adult boar spotted running down the road on the A509 in North Bucks.”

    https://twitter.com/wildboar_uk/status/1592833152263020544?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw

    How exciting! I hope they spread everywhere. Proper wild animals with a bit of edge
    And good sausages.
This discussion has been closed.