Howdy, Stranger!

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

Why the best value Mayoral bets are now on the Tories – politicalbetting.com

145679

Comments

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,327

    DavidL said:

    Honestly, Suella Braverman is a naughty word that gets you banned from PB.

    The home secretary acted unlawfully in failing to provide basic support to asylum seekers, including young children and pregnant women, a judge has ruled.

    Suella Braverman must introduce changes that will benefit thousands of asylum seekers after five successfully challenged the home secretary in the high court.

    Three of the claimants brought proceedings over delays in providing financial support while two challenged over failures to provide cash payments to pregnant women and to children under three years old.

    In his ruling, Mr Justice Swift found that the home secretary broke the law in withholding payments of £3 a week to provide healthy food for children aged one to three and to pregnant women.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/24/suella-braverman-acted-unlawfully-over-asylum-seekers-judge-rules

    Its just disgusting. To treat people who are so vulnerable and limited in what they can do for themselves so badly for such small sums. The fact that it is not shocking is the most depressing thing about it.
    It says so much about Rishi Sunak.
    That she is still in office? Yes, and none of it good I am afraid.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,762
    Count binface being elected mayor frankly would be a good thing. For 1 thing I doubt he would do any worse than the previous incumbents and secondly it would send a strong message to politicians....stop being clowns or we will just elect clowns
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,517
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Honestly, Suella Braverman is a naughty word that gets you banned from PB.

    The home secretary acted unlawfully in failing to provide basic support to asylum seekers, including young children and pregnant women, a judge has ruled.

    Suella Braverman must introduce changes that will benefit thousands of asylum seekers after five successfully challenged the home secretary in the high court.

    Three of the claimants brought proceedings over delays in providing financial support while two challenged over failures to provide cash payments to pregnant women and to children under three years old.

    In his ruling, Mr Justice Swift found that the home secretary broke the law in withholding payments of £3 a week to provide healthy food for children aged one to three and to pregnant women.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/24/suella-braverman-acted-unlawfully-over-asylum-seekers-judge-rules

    Its just disgusting. To treat people who are so vulnerable and limited in what they can do for themselves so badly for such small sums. The fact that it is not shocking is the most depressing thing about it.
    It says so much about Rishi Sunak.
    That she is still in office? Yes, and none of it good I am afraid.
    Indeed.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,643

    Labour is essentially the Australian cricket team.

    Not playing anything impressive but waiting for the rain to intervene to guarantee retention of the Ashes.

    Starmer is illustrating the difference between policy and politics.

    Policy is what you do when you get elected.

    Politics is what you do to get elected.

    I suspect there are plenty in Labour who worry polls like tonight's 49% in Deltapoll might be accurate but the support is a mile wide and an inch deep. Trying to hold the coalition together until polling day is the key - Roy Jenkins described Blair in 1997 as akin to a man walking down a hallway carrying a large and incredibly expensive vase. He is so frightened of dropping the vase he can't relax for a moment or consider other ways of getting down the hallway.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,762
    stodge said:

    Labour is essentially the Australian cricket team.

    Not playing anything impressive but waiting for the rain to intervene to guarantee retention of the Ashes.

    Starmer is illustrating the difference between policy and politics.

    Policy is what you do when you get elected.

    Politics is what you do to get elected.

    I suspect there are plenty in Labour who worry polls like tonight's 49% in Deltapoll might be accurate but the support is a mile wide and an inch deep. Trying to hold the coalition together until polling day is the key - Roy Jenkins described Blair in 1997 as akin to a man walking down a hallway carrying a large and incredibly expensive vase. He is so frightened of dropping the vase he can't relax for a moment or consider other ways of getting down the hallway.
    Are you claiming its right to go with policy after elected that you never said you would to get elected? You wonder why so many despise the lib dems.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,731
    Pagan2 said:

    Count binface being elected mayor frankly would be a good thing. For 1 thing I doubt he would do any worse than the previous incumbents and secondly it would send a strong message to politicians....stop being clowns or we will just elect clowns

    Hangus the monkey did a decent job in Hartlepool.

    At least Binface would do something about the hand dryer in The Crown and Treaty in Uxbridge. Something tangible to improve quality of life.

    https://www.countbinface.com/london-2021-manifesto
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,533
    viewcode said:

    ohnotnow said:

    viewcode said:

    @Leon, @Sandpit, you are both on the discussion group I created about Ukraine. The TLDR is that both sides have to burn up a goodly number of men and materiel to capture very small areas. The Ukraine counter offensive has over the past two months retaken two rectangles each about 50sq km in the Zaporhizia oblast. The Russian capture of Bakhmut took about 25sq km in a similar period. These moves are each less than 0.5% of the area of 2014 Ukraine.

    In that discussion group @LostPassword made some good points about attriting (yes, it's a word) the Russians: although I agree with him he thinks it'll take months and I think it'll take over a year. The war is following a similar structure to WW1: a war of manoeuvre expected to last month's becomes congested due to new weapons, movement ceases, trenches are laid, artillery uses up shells in their millions, there is a Shell Crisis as prewar stocks are used up and production must ramp up to keep the sides supplied.

    In the discussion group I gave links to three or four videos discussing the situation. The total watch time is about 3hrs so you would be forgiven for not watching them but they explain the supply and attrition issue in much greater depth.

    (Ps @rcs1000 do you want to join in? I'm on the tablet so I don't know how to add you)
    (PPS it takes a long time to burn up millions of men. Ukraine has a while to go yet)

    I would be interested in joining if it's an option? I encounter a fair number of alt-right/kremlin-line-trotting people so it would be good to have a balanced view of what's going on.

    Oh - and if it's any use to summarising long youtube videos, I wrote a little script the other day that can extract the transcripts and give a summary and/or a sentiment score to them. I'm looking to extend it to extract the audio and do speech-to-text on them so I can then summarise them.

    The things you do when you're "on holiday"...
    @ohnotnow . Done. Plz go to https://vf.politicalbetting.com/ and look at your inbox
    Ah! Thank you! Cheers!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,517
    ydoethur said:

    I'm surprised that the Tories' magnificent victory in Uxbridge hasn't led to any boost for them in today's R&W poll.

    Still, I guess it's just a matter of time until ULEZ revulsion spreads nationwide and destroys Labour's narrow lead.

    'Magnificent victory' ?

    Tories 495 votes majority and 6.7% swing against them

    Surely the term night be better applied to

    the LibDem's 11,008 majority and 28.4% swing in their favour

    or Labour's 4,161 majority and 21.4% swing in their favour

    It's normal to talk up your favoured party, but make it believable rather than laughable.
    Erm, I was being heavily ironic in both sentences, and my favoured party is Labour.
    Other than that, it's a fair cop.
    I am happy to give you and other PBers on how to be subtle.
    I don't think there are enough bricks in the world, Mr Eagles.
    It's a trinity with me.

    Subtlety, modesty, and shyness combined is a potent mix.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,274
    DavidL said:

    Honestly, Suella Braverman is a naughty word that gets you banned from PB.

    The home secretary acted unlawfully in failing to provide basic support to asylum seekers, including young children and pregnant women, a judge has ruled.

    Suella Braverman must introduce changes that will benefit thousands of asylum seekers after five successfully challenged the home secretary in the high court.

    Three of the claimants brought proceedings over delays in providing financial support while two challenged over failures to provide cash payments to pregnant women and to children under three years old.

    In his ruling, Mr Justice Swift found that the home secretary broke the law in withholding payments of £3 a week to provide healthy food for children aged one to three and to pregnant women.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/24/suella-braverman-acted-unlawfully-over-asylum-seekers-judge-rules

    Its just disgusting. To treat people who are so vulnerable and limited in what they can do for themselves so badly for such small sums. The fact that it is not shocking is the most depressing thing about it.
    Running jails and prisons not fit for a pigsty is one of the enduring core values of Anglo-American justice systems. (Ditto Roman, Napoleonic, etc., etc.)

    No need reviewing historical record re; UK & USA, as is legendary if still insufficiently aired (as in the day).

    In addition to Camp Suella Deville in today's UK, note lack of air conditioning for most prisoners for (I believe) most lock-ups in the USA Sunbelt. Helped keep me on straight and narrow (somewhat) when I was a resident.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 53,240

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    PSG accept the £259m bid for Mbappé from Al Hilal.

    He’s really going to play in SAUDI ARABIA for a year?

    It’s rare that I agree with @kinabalu - but I do here. It’s great for bantz but there is also something melancholy about it

    One of the world’s greatest athletes in the world’s greatest sport is gonna become a performing seal in a billionaire’s sporting circus

    IF this happens. Mbappe might tell ‘em to fuck off. Go on, Kylian
    I wonder how much footballers dream of winning the FA Cup these days as opposed to signing a contract at Mercenary Utd.

    I don't understand what the Saudis intend to do long term, though. They can buy some playthings for a short while but it isn't going to change anyone's view of the place, surely?
    Way back in the mists of time when Serie A and Primera Liga were the big leagues that everyone watched in the world the Premier League got excited by singing a few big name players - the likes of Juergen Klinsmann, Gianluca Vialli and Ruud Gullit. They weren’t at the peak of their careers but they brought a bit of style and stardom.

    Then when the Man City project got going they bought Robinho as a big star.

    Gradually these smallish statements were added to and as the Premier League got super savvy with selling global tv rights now that the product was a mix of good fun football and stars they made huge money which enabled more stars and because the money was great for players and stars had started arriving more stars went to the EPL and the Spanish and Italian leagues started disappearing in the rear view mirror.

    The Saudi league will start being a popular view in a lot of Asia, South America and Africa and the Saudis won’t charge a lot for rights which will make it attractive to broadcasters so people get to see some big names playing that they recognise - much like the Premier league when it started to take off. And then the cycle continues, more top coaches and players will go, not just in the twilight of their careers, and you will possibly end up with a de-facto super league where everyone in the world can choose their new team based on their players with no old loyalties to their local clubs getting in the way.

    They will get the World Cup too and no doubt an offer to host FIFA HQ and then job is done.
    No. Not going to happen

    Why? Because the EPL was in a unique position to take over the top spot of club football leagues. It has the pedigree, the history and the supporters. If you talk to people abroad who really follow English football, this means an enormous amount to them. By supporting Villa or Spurs or Liverpool or Man U or - God knows -Wrexham! - they are buying into an ancient story, a 100 year old club with its bloodlines and taboos, its history of triumphs and disasters. This is absorbed and becomes emotionally meaningful

    You cannot confect this out of nothing (and it doesn’t help if your language is Arabic not English)

    This is exactly why French luxury goods sell so well. L’Oreal to Chanel to Louis Vuitton to French wine, fashion and cognac. They have a pedigree, A cachet which absolutely cannot be replicated. A Chinese company could start selling perfume or moisturiser “technically superior” to Chanel but Jeez it would have to be incredibly superior to get people buying Xi Biang number 9 not Chanel number 5. And it won’t be superior coz in the end it is just perfume. A pong

    English/British sports have the cachet of French luxury goods. The history and pedigree

    For the same reason, Saudi cannot actually replace the Masters, or the Open at St Andrews. They can BUY a form of control, but that is different
    This is right. Export goods for the global market have in them an essence of that country's character, or perceptions of character. They have to, to succeed. It's not just the intrinsic product itself but the emotion that the consumer gains from it; the culture they're buying in to. And you can't manufacture that out of nothing.
    Janan Ganesh did an excellent article on this. On how Europe - especially France and Italy - essentially make a living from selling “Europe” as a posh brand, to everyone else

    In the end a handbag is a bloody handbag, but slap Chanel or Gucci on it, and it becomes something better. And LVMH is one of the biggest consumer companies in the world, thereby

    Britain is capitalising on the cachet we have in sports: coz we invented them all

    You can, however, create cachet in new forms of consumer goods. Apple is an example. When a rare example of a first gen iPhone sells for $100,000 (which it recently did) then the Apple brand has clearly become the tech equivalent of a Grand Cru label
    The trouble is we are not sexy. There is still an element of cool though, think about the Union Jack. What we are is sold, old reliable Britain. Sound finance, property rights, legal justice. If you're looking for a one night stand go to France or Italy. If you're looking for a solid partner for the next 40 years, nothing fancy, basic food, bad weather, warm beer, come to Britain.
    Disagree. We are sexy but in a different way
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    Pagan2 said:

    Count binface being elected mayor frankly would be a good thing. For 1 thing I doubt he would do any worse than the previous incumbents and secondly it would send a strong message to politicians....stop being clowns or we will just elect clowns

    In the case of London, Khan is the first one who *isn't* a clown.
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,091
    edited July 2023
    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,358

    What we are is sold, old reliable Britain. Sound finance, property rights, legal justice. If you're looking for a one night stand go to France or Italy. If you're looking for a solid partner for the next 40 years, nothing fancy, basic food, bad weather, warm beer, come to Britain.

    All completely fucked by Brexit
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,274
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    PSG accept the £259m bid for Mbappé from Al Hilal.

    He’s really going to play in SAUDI ARABIA for a year?

    It’s rare that I agree with @kinabalu - but I do here. It’s great for bantz but there is also something melancholy about it

    One of the world’s greatest athletes in the world’s greatest sport is gonna become a performing seal in a billionaire’s sporting circus

    IF this happens. Mbappe might tell ‘em to fuck off. Go on, Kylian
    I wonder how much footballers dream of winning the FA Cup these days as opposed to signing a contract at Mercenary Utd.

    I don't understand what the Saudis intend to do long term, though. They can buy some playthings for a short while but it isn't going to change anyone's view of the place, surely?
    Way back in the mists of time when Serie A and Primera Liga were the big leagues that everyone watched in the world the Premier League got excited by singing a few big name players - the likes of Juergen Klinsmann, Gianluca Vialli and Ruud Gullit. They weren’t at the peak of their careers but they brought a bit of style and stardom.

    Then when the Man City project got going they bought Robinho as a big star.

    Gradually these smallish statements were added to and as the Premier League got super savvy with selling global tv rights now that the product was a mix of good fun football and stars they made huge money which enabled more stars and because the money was great for players and stars had started arriving more stars went to the EPL and the Spanish and Italian leagues started disappearing in the rear view mirror.

    The Saudi league will start being a popular view in a lot of Asia, South America and Africa and the Saudis won’t charge a lot for rights which will make it attractive to broadcasters so people get to see some big names playing that they recognise - much like the Premier league when it started to take off. And then the cycle continues, more top coaches and players will go, not just in the twilight of their careers, and you will possibly end up with a de-facto super league where everyone in the world can choose their new team based on their players with no old loyalties to their local clubs getting in the way.

    They will get the World Cup too and no doubt an offer to host FIFA HQ and then job is done.
    No. Not going to happen

    Why? Because the EPL was in a unique position to take over the top spot of club football leagues. It has the pedigree, the history and the supporters. If you talk to people abroad who really follow English football, this means an enormous amount to them. By supporting Villa or Spurs or Liverpool or Man U or - God knows -Wrexham! - they are buying into an ancient story, a 100 year old club with its bloodlines and taboos, its history of triumphs and disasters. This is absorbed and becomes emotionally meaningful

    You cannot confect this out of nothing (and it doesn’t help if your language is Arabic not English)

    This is exactly why French luxury goods sell so well. L’Oreal to Chanel to Louis Vuitton to French wine, fashion and cognac. They have a pedigree, A cachet which absolutely cannot be replicated. A Chinese company could start selling perfume or moisturiser “technically superior” to Chanel but Jeez it would have to be incredibly superior to get people buying Xi Biang number 9 not Chanel number 5. And it won’t be superior coz in the end it is just perfume. A pong

    English/British sports have the cachet of French luxury goods. The history and pedigree

    For the same reason, Saudi cannot actually replace the Masters, or the Open at St Andrews. They can BUY a form of control, but that is different
    This is right. Export goods for the global market have in them an essence of that country's character, or perceptions of character. They have to, to succeed. It's not just the intrinsic product itself but the emotion that the consumer gains from it; the culture they're buying in to. And you can't manufacture that out of nothing.
    Janan Ganesh did an excellent article on this. On how Europe - especially France and Italy - essentially make a living from selling “Europe” as a posh brand, to everyone else

    In the end a handbag is a bloody handbag, but slap Chanel or Gucci on it, and it becomes something better. And LVMH is one of the biggest consumer companies in the world, thereby

    Britain is capitalising on the cachet we have in sports: coz we invented them all

    You can, however, create cachet in new forms of consumer goods. Apple is an example. When a rare example of a first gen iPhone sells for $100,000 (which it recently did) then the Apple brand has clearly become the tech equivalent of a Grand Cru label
    The trouble is we are not sexy. There is still an element of cool though, think about the Union Jack. What we are is sold, old reliable Britain. Sound finance, property rights, legal justice. If you're looking for a one night stand go to France or Italy. If you're looking for a solid partner for the next 40 years, nothing fancy, basic food, bad weather, warm beer, come to Britain.
    Disagree. We are sexy but in a different way
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vsANcS4Ml8
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,643
    Pagan2 said:

    stodge said:

    Labour is essentially the Australian cricket team.

    Not playing anything impressive but waiting for the rain to intervene to guarantee retention of the Ashes.

    Starmer is illustrating the difference between policy and politics.

    Policy is what you do when you get elected.

    Politics is what you do to get elected.

    I suspect there are plenty in Labour who worry polls like tonight's 49% in Deltapoll might be accurate but the support is a mile wide and an inch deep. Trying to hold the coalition together until polling day is the key - Roy Jenkins described Blair in 1997 as akin to a man walking down a hallway carrying a large and incredibly expensive vase. He is so frightened of dropping the vase he can't relax for a moment or consider other ways of getting down the hallway.
    Are you claiming its right to go with policy after elected that you never said you would to get elected? You wonder why so many despise the lib dems.
    No, I'm not.

    The key to being able to do anything is to get elected - it's very rare radical manifestos get oppositions elected - the last real instance was Heath in 1970 (before that Attlee in 1945 under unique circumstances). Thatcher's 1979 Manifesto was more pragmatic (and of course coincided with the mood) - the radical aspects to Thatcherism came through in the second term.

    The first term of a Starmer Administration would likely be pragmatic - undoing or changing the worst excesses of Conservative mismanagement (which will be supported). The manifesto for the second term will reveal whether there is any radical edge to Starmer - Blair won his re-election against Hague but was denied the chance to enact radical policies by the events of September 11th 2001 which fundamentally re-defined politics.

    It may well be Blair's radical cupboard was bare - it may be Starmer's is as well, I don't know. At least they have something - the Conservatives are ideologically exhausted and bankrupt.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,003
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    No dramatic changes on tonight's R&W with a solid 17-point lead for Labour.

    In England, it's Labour 46%, Conservative 29%, Liberal Democrat 15%, Green 4.5%, Reform 4.5% and Others 1%.

    Boris Johnson's Conservatives won England 47-34-12 in December 2019 so that's a 15% swing from Conservative to Labour and a 10.5% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat.

    Deltapoll has Labour on 49% and the Conservatives on 26% with the LDs on 9%, Greens on 5% and Reform on 4%. That's the GB numbers and would be a 17.5% swing from Conservative to Labour which would be a Labour landslide.

    However, as we've seen in Spain, there are polls and there are elections just as there are policies and there is politics. PP underperformed some of their polling but PSOE out-performed all theirs.

    Two-party politics are back in Spain with both PP and PSOE advancing in seats and votes and VOX and SUMAR both losing ground (as did a host of minor parties). Sanchez may not have won but he didn't lose as completely as many thought and Feijoo's 136 seat tally looks insufficient for even a minority Government in a way 150 seats wouldn't have.

    Feijoo picked up most of the moribund Citizens votes and seats but PP's progress was as much against VOX as it was against the Left so the net effect was diluted.

    The four parties control 322 of the 350 seats in the Cortes and the PP/VOX group have 169 with PSOE/SUMAR on 153. The remaining 28 deputies hold the balance - 14 are from Catalonia and 11 from the Basque Country. I suspect there'll be a lot of courting in the Cortes (sorry) - Junts have already said they're not playing unless Catalonian independence is on the table (which it won't be).

    If the centre-left parties in Catalonia and the Basque Country supported a new PSOE minority (as they did before) it would be 169-166 which would leave the 5 Basque Nationalists and the single representatives from the Galician, Canarian and Navarrese regional groups holding the balance.

    It's looking like Round 2 before too long - will VOX follow Citizens into decline and oblivion? It's certainly a brake on the apparently unstoppable progress of populist nationalism.

    There is no stable government in Spain on the cards with nationalists pushing for independence with balance of power
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,139
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    No dramatic changes on tonight's R&W with a solid 17-point lead for Labour.

    In England, it's Labour 46%, Conservative 29%, Liberal Democrat 15%, Green 4.5%, Reform 4.5% and Others 1%.

    Boris Johnson's Conservatives won England 47-34-12 in December 2019 so that's a 15% swing from Conservative to Labour and a 10.5% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat.

    Deltapoll has Labour on 49% and the Conservatives on 26% with the LDs on 9%, Greens on 5% and Reform on 4%. That's the GB numbers and would be a 17.5% swing from Conservative to Labour which would be a Labour landslide.

    However, as we've seen in Spain, there are polls and there are elections just as there are policies and there is politics. PP underperformed some of their polling but PSOE out-performed all theirs.

    Two-party politics are back in Spain with both PP and PSOE advancing in seats and votes and VOX and SUMAR both losing ground (as did a host of minor parties). Sanchez may not have won but he didn't lose as completely as many thought and Feijoo's 136 seat tally looks insufficient for even a minority Government in a way 150 seats wouldn't have.

    Feijoo picked up most of the moribund Citizens votes and seats but PP's progress was as much against VOX as it was against the Left so the net effect was diluted.

    The four parties control 322 of the 350 seats in the Cortes and the PP/VOX group have 169 with PSOE/SUMAR on 153. The remaining 28 deputies hold the balance - 14 are from Catalonia and 11 from the Basque Country. I suspect there'll be a lot of courting in the Cortes (sorry) - Junts have already said they're not playing unless Catalonian independence is on the table (which it won't be).

    If the centre-left parties in Catalonia and the Basque Country supported a new PSOE minority (as they did before) it would be 169-166 which would leave the 5 Basque Nationalists and the single representatives from the Galician, Canarian and Navarrese regional groups holding the balance.

    It's looking like Round 2 before too long - will VOX follow Citizens into decline and oblivion? It's certainly a brake on the apparently unstoppable progress of populist nationalism.

    Sanchez hopes to
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    No dramatic changes on tonight's R&W with a solid 17-point lead for Labour.

    In England, it's Labour 46%, Conservative 29%, Liberal Democrat 15%, Green 4.5%, Reform 4.5% and Others 1%.

    Boris Johnson's Conservatives won England 47-34-12 in December 2019 so that's a 15% swing from Conservative to Labour and a 10.5% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat.

    Deltapoll has Labour on 49% and the Conservatives on 26% with the LDs on 9%, Greens on 5% and Reform on 4%. That's the GB numbers and would be a 17.5% swing from Conservative to Labour which would be a Labour landslide.

    However, as we've seen in Spain, there are polls and there are elections just as there are policies and there is politics. PP underperformed some of their polling but PSOE out-performed all theirs.

    Two-party politics are back in Spain with both PP and PSOE advancing in seats and votes and VOX and SUMAR both losing ground (as did a host of minor parties). Sanchez may not have won but he didn't lose as completely as many thought and Feijoo's 136 seat tally looks insufficient for even a minority Government in a way 150 seats wouldn't have.

    Feijoo picked up most of the moribund Citizens votes and seats but PP's progress was as much against VOX as it was against the Left so the net effect was diluted.

    The four parties control 322 of the 350 seats in the Cortes and the PP/VOX group have 169 with PSOE/SUMAR on 153. The remaining 28 deputies hold the balance - 14 are from Catalonia and 11 from the Basque Country. I suspect there'll be a lot of courting in the Cortes (sorry) - Junts have already said they're not playing unless Catalonian independence is on the table (which it won't be).

    If the centre-left parties in Catalonia and the Basque Country supported a new PSOE minority (as they did before) it would be 169-166 which would leave the 5 Basque Nationalists and the single representatives from the Galician, Canarian and Navarrese regional groups holding the balance.

    It's looking like Round 2 before too long - will VOX follow Citizens into decline and oblivion? It's certainly a brake on the apparently unstoppable progress of populist nationalism.

    Sanchez hopes to win on the second round Congress vote where only a simple majority is needed. Estimates suggest 171 v 170! But he'd be unlikely to survive long without granting a Catalan independence vote. In addition the Senate now has an absolute majoirtiy for PP which could cause problems with any, but especially, constitutional changes. It does ssem that Autumn elections are likely. I'm not convinced that Sanchez' triumphalist speech last night will go down well with the public. He was a clear second after all.

    On the other hand PP failed to seal the deal and it's possible that Feijoo may resign at some point with the current Andalucian President Juanma Moreno taking over. He won an absolute majority in Andalucía barely 2 years ago. He is popular, centrist and has the beating of both Vox and PSOE here in the south.

    Finally SUMAR who replaced Podemos on the far left also lost a bunch of seats although my feeling is that both they and Vox will continue. The PSOE also remain less strong because of the various nationalist groups and that seems set in stone for the moment althoug many did lose some ground last night. Politics here likley will remain volatile for a while yet.

    Oh and yes several polling companies need industrial strength cleaning agents to get a lot eggs off their faces .
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,271

    ydoethur said:

    I'm surprised that the Tories' magnificent victory in Uxbridge hasn't led to any boost for them in today's R&W poll.

    Still, I guess it's just a matter of time until ULEZ revulsion spreads nationwide and destroys Labour's narrow lead.

    'Magnificent victory' ?

    Tories 495 votes majority and 6.7% swing against them

    Surely the term night be better applied to

    the LibDem's 11,008 majority and 28.4% swing in their favour

    or Labour's 4,161 majority and 21.4% swing in their favour

    It's normal to talk up your favoured party, but make it believable rather than laughable.
    Erm, I was being heavily ironic in both sentences, and my favoured party is Labour.
    Other than that, it's a fair cop.
    I am happy to give you and other PBers on how to be subtle.
    I don't think there are enough bricks in the world, Mr Eagles.
    It's a trinity with me.

    Subtlety, modesty, and shyness combined is a potent mix.
    You certainly can't add grammar to your mix. Are.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    edited July 2023
    murali_s said:

    DavidL said:

    Honestly, Suella Braverman is a naughty word that gets you banned from PB.

    The home secretary acted unlawfully in failing to provide basic support to asylum seekers, including young children and pregnant women, a judge has ruled.

    Suella Braverman must introduce changes that will benefit thousands of asylum seekers after five successfully challenged the home secretary in the high court.

    Three of the claimants brought proceedings over delays in providing financial support while two challenged over failures to provide cash payments to pregnant women and to children under three years old.

    In his ruling, Mr Justice Swift found that the home secretary broke the law in withholding payments of £3 a week to provide healthy food for children aged one to three and to pregnant women.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/24/suella-braverman-acted-unlawfully-over-asylum-seekers-judge-rules

    Its just disgusting. To treat people who are so vulnerable and limited in what they can do for themselves so badly for such small sums. The fact that it is not shocking is the most depressing thing about it.
    Sums up the state of the modern Conservative Party. Utter filth! Seriously, is there anyone dumb enough to vote Tory next time round?
    Tens of millions. Well, millions anyway.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,003

    I'm surprised that the Tories' magnificent victory in Uxbridge hasn't led to any boost for them in today's R&W poll.

    Still, I guess it's just a matter of time until ULEZ revulsion spreads nationwide and destroys Labour's narrow lead.

    It will be an issue in the M25 belt however
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 118,517

    ydoethur said:

    I'm surprised that the Tories' magnificent victory in Uxbridge hasn't led to any boost for them in today's R&W poll.

    Still, I guess it's just a matter of time until ULEZ revulsion spreads nationwide and destroys Labour's narrow lead.

    'Magnificent victory' ?

    Tories 495 votes majority and 6.7% swing against them

    Surely the term night be better applied to

    the LibDem's 11,008 majority and 28.4% swing in their favour

    or Labour's 4,161 majority and 21.4% swing in their favour

    It's normal to talk up your favoured party, but make it believable rather than laughable.
    Erm, I was being heavily ironic in both sentences, and my favoured party is Labour.
    Other than that, it's a fair cop.
    I am happy to give you and other PBers on how to be subtle.
    I don't think there are enough bricks in the world, Mr Eagles.
    It's a trinity with me.

    Subtlety, modesty, and shyness combined is a potent mix.
    You certainly can't add grammar to your mix. Are.
    I am blaming autocorrect.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,731
    Scott_xP said:

    What we are is sold, old reliable Britain. Sound finance, property rights, legal justice. If you're looking for a one night stand go to France or Italy. If you're looking for a solid partner for the next 40 years, nothing fancy, basic food, bad weather, warm beer, come to Britain.

    All completely fucked by Brexit
    Nah, the bad weather hasn't changed.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    What we are is sold, old reliable Britain. Sound finance, property rights, legal justice. If you're looking for a one night stand go to France or Italy. If you're looking for a solid partner for the next 40 years, nothing fancy, basic food, bad weather, warm beer, come to Britain.

    All completely fucked by Brexit
    Nah, the bad weather hasn't changed.
    The EU's rain continues?
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,274
    On criminal-justice front, keep picking up rumors (via my trusty tin-foil helmet) that Sir Jacob Rees-Moog is preparing legislation, that will repeal extension of "benefit of clergy" to any literate layperson with respect to mitigation of sentences for capital crimes.

    Thus repealing infamous proto-Woke statute of Edward III (1351).
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,533
    edited July 2023

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    PSG accept the £259m bid for Mbappé from Al Hilal.

    He’s really going to play in SAUDI ARABIA for a year?

    It’s rare that I agree with @kinabalu - but I do here. It’s great for bantz but there is also something melancholy about it

    One of the world’s greatest athletes in the world’s greatest sport is gonna become a performing seal in a billionaire’s sporting circus

    IF this happens. Mbappe might tell ‘em to fuck off. Go on, Kylian
    I wonder how much footballers dream of winning the FA Cup these days as opposed to signing a contract at Mercenary Utd.

    I don't understand what the Saudis intend to do long term, though. They can buy some playthings for a short while but it isn't going to change anyone's view of the place, surely?
    Way back in the mists of time when Serie A and Primera Liga were the big leagues that everyone watched in the world the Premier League got excited by singing a few big name players - the likes of Juergen Klinsmann, Gianluca Vialli and Ruud Gullit. They weren’t at the peak of their careers but they brought a bit of style and stardom.

    Then when the Man City project got going they bought Robinho as a big star.

    Gradually these smallish statements were added to and as the Premier League got super savvy with selling global tv rights now that the product was a mix of good fun football and stars they made huge money which enabled more stars and because the money was great for players and stars had started arriving more stars went to the EPL and the Spanish and Italian leagues started disappearing in the rear view mirror.

    The Saudi league will start being a popular view in a lot of Asia, South America and Africa and the Saudis won’t charge a lot for rights which will make it attractive to broadcasters so people get to see some big names playing that they recognise - much like the Premier league when it started to take off. And then the cycle continues, more top coaches and players will go, not just in the twilight of their careers, and you will possibly end up with a de-facto super league where everyone in the world can choose their new team based on their players with no old loyalties to their local clubs getting in the way.

    They will get the World Cup too and no doubt an offer to host FIFA HQ and then job is done.
    No. Not going to happen

    Why? Because the EPL was in a unique position to take over the top spot of club football leagues. It has the pedigree, the history and the supporters. If you talk to people abroad who really follow English football, this means an enormous amount to them. By supporting Villa or Spurs or Liverpool or Man U or - God knows -Wrexham! - they are buying into an ancient story, a 100 year old club with its bloodlines and taboos, its history of triumphs and disasters. This is absorbed and becomes emotionally meaningful

    You cannot confect this out of nothing (and it doesn’t help if your language is Arabic not English)

    This is exactly why French luxury goods sell so well. L’Oreal to Chanel to Louis Vuitton to French wine, fashion and cognac. They have a pedigree, A cachet which absolutely cannot be replicated. A Chinese company could start selling perfume or moisturiser “technically superior” to Chanel but Jeez it would have to be incredibly superior to get people buying Xi Biang number 9 not Chanel number 5. And it won’t be superior coz in the end it is just perfume. A pong

    English/British sports have the cachet of French luxury goods. The history and pedigree

    For the same reason, Saudi cannot actually replace the Masters, or the Open at St Andrews. They can BUY a form of control, but that is different
    This is right. Export goods for the global market have in them an essence of that country's character, or perceptions of character. They have to, to succeed. It's not just the intrinsic product itself but the emotion that the consumer gains from it; the culture they're buying in to. And you can't manufacture that out of nothing.
    Janan Ganesh did an excellent article on this. On how Europe - especially France and Italy - essentially make a living from selling “Europe” as a posh brand, to everyone else

    In the end a handbag is a bloody handbag, but slap Chanel or Gucci on it, and it becomes something better. And LVMH is one of the biggest consumer companies in the world, thereby

    Britain is capitalising on the cachet we have in sports: coz we invented them all

    You can, however, create cachet in new forms of consumer goods. Apple is an example. When a rare example of a first gen iPhone sells for $100,000 (which it recently did) then the Apple brand has clearly become the tech equivalent of a Grand Cru label
    The trouble is we are not sexy. There is still an element of cool though, think about the Union Jack. What we are is sold, old reliable Britain. Sound finance, property rights, legal justice. If you're looking for a one night stand go to France or Italy. If you're looking for a solid partner for the next 40 years, nothing fancy, basic food, bad weather, warm beer, come to Britain.
    I vaguely remember listening to an old 'From Our Own Correspondent' on R4 and various Dutch women saying they were attracted to British men as they didn't just say the truth.

    Dutch:
    lady: Does this dress make me look fat?
    guy: Yes. Because you are fat. The dress just makes it worse.

    British:
    lady: Does this dress make me look fat?
    guy: You always look wonderful, darling!
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,274
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    What we are is sold, old reliable Britain. Sound finance, property rights, legal justice. If you're looking for a one night stand go to France or Italy. If you're looking for a solid partner for the next 40 years, nothing fancy, basic food, bad weather, warm beer, come to Britain.

    All completely fucked by Brexit
    Nah, the bad weather hasn't changed.
    The EU's rain continues?
    Right-wing reign in Spain, fell mainly on the plain.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,731
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    What we are is sold, old reliable Britain. Sound finance, property rights, legal justice. If you're looking for a one night stand go to France or Italy. If you're looking for a solid partner for the next 40 years, nothing fancy, basic food, bad weather, warm beer, come to Britain.

    All completely fucked by Brexit
    Nah, the bad weather hasn't changed.
    The EU's rain continues?
    There's snow need to complain about this summer.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 16,544
    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    Gove has always been pretty good at identifying the problems that need solving; it's his solutions and their implimentation that tend to be unconvincing-to-hopeless.

    With a bit of luck, the overlap between this and what Starmer has said about housing is substantial enough to be useful.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,533
    kle4 said:

    murali_s said:

    DavidL said:

    Honestly, Suella Braverman is a naughty word that gets you banned from PB.

    The home secretary acted unlawfully in failing to provide basic support to asylum seekers, including young children and pregnant women, a judge has ruled.

    Suella Braverman must introduce changes that will benefit thousands of asylum seekers after five successfully challenged the home secretary in the high court.

    Three of the claimants brought proceedings over delays in providing financial support while two challenged over failures to provide cash payments to pregnant women and to children under three years old.

    In his ruling, Mr Justice Swift found that the home secretary broke the law in withholding payments of £3 a week to provide healthy food for children aged one to three and to pregnant women.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/24/suella-braverman-acted-unlawfully-over-asylum-seekers-judge-rules

    Its just disgusting. To treat people who are so vulnerable and limited in what they can do for themselves so badly for such small sums. The fact that it is not shocking is the most depressing thing about it.
    Sums up the state of the modern Conservative Party. Utter filth! Seriously, is there anyone dumb enough to vote Tory next time round?
    Tens of millions. Well, millions anyway.
    Dozens, round my way.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,731

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    Gove has always been pretty good at identifying the problems that need solving; it's his solutions and their implimentation that tend to be unconvincing-to-hopeless.

    With a bit of luck, the overlap between this and what Starmer has said about housing is substantial enough to be useful.
    Looking forward to him at Health...
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,274
    felix said:

    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    No dramatic changes on tonight's R&W with a solid 17-point lead for Labour.

    In England, it's Labour 46%, Conservative 29%, Liberal Democrat 15%, Green 4.5%, Reform 4.5% and Others 1%.

    Boris Johnson's Conservatives won England 47-34-12 in December 2019 so that's a 15% swing from Conservative to Labour and a 10.5% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat.

    Deltapoll has Labour on 49% and the Conservatives on 26% with the LDs on 9%, Greens on 5% and Reform on 4%. That's the GB numbers and would be a 17.5% swing from Conservative to Labour which would be a Labour landslide.

    However, as we've seen in Spain, there are polls and there are elections just as there are policies and there is politics. PP underperformed some of their polling but PSOE out-performed all theirs.

    Two-party politics are back in Spain with both PP and PSOE advancing in seats and votes and VOX and SUMAR both losing ground (as did a host of minor parties). Sanchez may not have won but he didn't lose as completely as many thought and Feijoo's 136 seat tally looks insufficient for even a minority Government in a way 150 seats wouldn't have.

    Feijoo picked up most of the moribund Citizens votes and seats but PP's progress was as much against VOX as it was against the Left so the net effect was diluted.

    The four parties control 322 of the 350 seats in the Cortes and the PP/VOX group have 169 with PSOE/SUMAR on 153. The remaining 28 deputies hold the balance - 14 are from Catalonia and 11 from the Basque Country. I suspect there'll be a lot of courting in the Cortes (sorry) - Junts have already said they're not playing unless Catalonian independence is on the table (which it won't be).

    If the centre-left parties in Catalonia and the Basque Country supported a new PSOE minority (as they did before) it would be 169-166 which would leave the 5 Basque Nationalists and the single representatives from the Galician, Canarian and Navarrese regional groups holding the balance.

    It's looking like Round 2 before too long - will VOX follow Citizens into decline and oblivion? It's certainly a brake on the apparently unstoppable progress of populist nationalism.

    Sanchez hopes to
    stodge said:

    Evening all :)

    No dramatic changes on tonight's R&W with a solid 17-point lead for Labour.

    In England, it's Labour 46%, Conservative 29%, Liberal Democrat 15%, Green 4.5%, Reform 4.5% and Others 1%.

    Boris Johnson's Conservatives won England 47-34-12 in December 2019 so that's a 15% swing from Conservative to Labour and a 10.5% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat.

    Deltapoll has Labour on 49% and the Conservatives on 26% with the LDs on 9%, Greens on 5% and Reform on 4%. That's the GB numbers and would be a 17.5% swing from Conservative to Labour which would be a Labour landslide.

    However, as we've seen in Spain, there are polls and there are elections just as there are policies and there is politics. PP underperformed some of their polling but PSOE out-performed all theirs.

    Two-party politics are back in Spain with both PP and PSOE advancing in seats and votes and VOX and SUMAR both losing ground (as did a host of minor parties). Sanchez may not have won but he didn't lose as completely as many thought and Feijoo's 136 seat tally looks insufficient for even a minority Government in a way 150 seats wouldn't have.

    Feijoo picked up most of the moribund Citizens votes and seats but PP's progress was as much against VOX as it was against the Left so the net effect was diluted.

    The four parties control 322 of the 350 seats in the Cortes and the PP/VOX group have 169 with PSOE/SUMAR on 153. The remaining 28 deputies hold the balance - 14 are from Catalonia and 11 from the Basque Country. I suspect there'll be a lot of courting in the Cortes (sorry) - Junts have already said they're not playing unless Catalonian independence is on the table (which it won't be).

    If the centre-left parties in Catalonia and the Basque Country supported a new PSOE minority (as they did before) it would be 169-166 which would leave the 5 Basque Nationalists and the single representatives from the Galician, Canarian and Navarrese regional groups holding the balance.

    It's looking like Round 2 before too long - will VOX follow Citizens into decline and oblivion? It's certainly a brake on the apparently unstoppable progress of populist nationalism.

    Sanchez hopes to win on the second round Congress vote where only a simple majority is needed. Estimates suggest 171 v 170! But he'd be unlikely to survive long without granting a Catalan independence vote. In addition the Senate now has an absolute majoirtiy for PP which could cause problems with any, but especially, constitutional changes. It does ssem that Autumn elections are likely. I'm not convinced that Sanchez' triumphalist speech last night will go down well with the public. He was a clear second after all.

    On the other hand PP failed to seal the deal and it's possible that Feijoo may resign at some point with the current Andalucian President Juanma Moreno taking over. He won an absolute majority in Andalucía barely 2 years ago. He is popular, centrist and has the beating of both Vox and PSOE here in the south.

    Finally SUMAR who replaced Podemos on the far left also lost a bunch of seats although my feeling is that both they and Vox will continue. The PSOE also remain less strong because of the various nationalist groups and that seems set in stone for the moment althoug many did lose some ground last night. Politics here likley will remain volatile for a while yet.

    Oh and yes several polling companies need industrial strength cleaning agents to get a lot eggs off their faces .
    Is it possible, that the ultimate winner of this fandango, will prove to be the party/bloc/leader that manages to NOT become presidente del gobierno por un día? And which uses the interval as eventual springboard to (more) sustained period in power.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,003
    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,112
    ohnotnow said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    PSG accept the £259m bid for Mbappé from Al Hilal.

    He’s really going to play in SAUDI ARABIA for a year?

    It’s rare that I agree with @kinabalu - but I do here. It’s great for bantz but there is also something melancholy about it

    One of the world’s greatest athletes in the world’s greatest sport is gonna become a performing seal in a billionaire’s sporting circus

    IF this happens. Mbappe might tell ‘em to fuck off. Go on, Kylian
    I wonder how much footballers dream of winning the FA Cup these days as opposed to signing a contract at Mercenary Utd.

    I don't understand what the Saudis intend to do long term, though. They can buy some playthings for a short while but it isn't going to change anyone's view of the place, surely?
    Way back in the mists of time when Serie A and Primera Liga were the big leagues that everyone watched in the world the Premier League got excited by singing a few big name players - the likes of Juergen Klinsmann, Gianluca Vialli and Ruud Gullit. They weren’t at the peak of their careers but they brought a bit of style and stardom.

    Then when the Man City project got going they bought Robinho as a big star.

    Gradually these smallish statements were added to and as the Premier League got super savvy with selling global tv rights now that the product was a mix of good fun football and stars they made huge money which enabled more stars and because the money was great for players and stars had started arriving more stars went to the EPL and the Spanish and Italian leagues started disappearing in the rear view mirror.

    The Saudi league will start being a popular view in a lot of Asia, South America and Africa and the Saudis won’t charge a lot for rights which will make it attractive to broadcasters so people get to see some big names playing that they recognise - much like the Premier league when it started to take off. And then the cycle continues, more top coaches and players will go, not just in the twilight of their careers, and you will possibly end up with a de-facto super league where everyone in the world can choose their new team based on their players with no old loyalties to their local clubs getting in the way.

    They will get the World Cup too and no doubt an offer to host FIFA HQ and then job is done.
    No. Not going to happen

    Why? Because the EPL was in a unique position to take over the top spot of club football leagues. It has the pedigree, the history and the supporters. If you talk to people abroad who really follow English football, this means an enormous amount to them. By supporting Villa or Spurs or Liverpool or Man U or - God knows -Wrexham! - they are buying into an ancient story, a 100 year old club with its bloodlines and taboos, its history of triumphs and disasters. This is absorbed and becomes emotionally meaningful

    You cannot confect this out of nothing (and it doesn’t help if your language is Arabic not English)

    This is exactly why French luxury goods sell so well. L’Oreal to Chanel to Louis Vuitton to French wine, fashion and cognac. They have a pedigree, A cachet which absolutely cannot be replicated. A Chinese company could start selling perfume or moisturiser “technically superior” to Chanel but Jeez it would have to be incredibly superior to get people buying Xi Biang number 9 not Chanel number 5. And it won’t be superior coz in the end it is just perfume. A pong

    English/British sports have the cachet of French luxury goods. The history and pedigree

    For the same reason, Saudi cannot actually replace the Masters, or the Open at St Andrews. They can BUY a form of control, but that is different
    This is right. Export goods for the global market have in them an essence of that country's character, or perceptions of character. They have to, to succeed. It's not just the intrinsic product itself but the emotion that the consumer gains from it; the culture they're buying in to. And you can't manufacture that out of nothing.
    Janan Ganesh did an excellent article on this. On how Europe - especially France and Italy - essentially make a living from selling “Europe” as a posh brand, to everyone else

    In the end a handbag is a bloody handbag, but slap Chanel or Gucci on it, and it becomes something better. And LVMH is one of the biggest consumer companies in the world, thereby

    Britain is capitalising on the cachet we have in sports: coz we invented them all

    You can, however, create cachet in new forms of consumer goods. Apple is an example. When a rare example of a first gen iPhone sells for $100,000 (which it recently did) then the Apple brand has clearly become the tech equivalent of a Grand Cru label
    The trouble is we are not sexy. There is still an element of cool though, think about the Union Jack. What we are is sold, old reliable Britain. Sound finance, property rights, legal justice. If you're looking for a one night stand go to France or Italy. If you're looking for a solid partner for the next 40 years, nothing fancy, basic food, bad weather, warm beer, come to Britain.
    I vaguely remember listening to an old 'From Our Own Correspondent' on R4 and various Dutch women saying they were attracted to British men as they didn't just say the truth.

    Dutch:
    lady: Does this dress make me look fat?
    guy: Yes. Because you are fat. The dress just makes it worse.

    British:
    lady: Does this dress make me look fat?
    guy: You always look wonderful, darling!
    The Dutch are all slim though, of course.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,643
    felix said:


    Sanchez hopes to win on the second round Congress vote where only a simple majority is needed. Estimates suggest 171 v 170! But he'd be unlikely to survive long without granting a Catalan independence vote. In addition the Senate now has an absolute majoirtiy for PP which could cause problems with any, but especially, constitutional changes. It does ssem that Autumn elections are likely. I'm not convinced that Sanchez' triumphalist speech last night will go down well with the public. He was a clear second after all.

    On the other hand PP failed to seal the deal and it's possible that Feijoo may resign at some point with the current Andalucian President Juanma Moreno taking over. He won an absolute majority in Andalucía barely 2 years ago. He is popular, centrist and has the beating of both Vox and PSOE here in the south.

    Finally SUMAR who replaced Podemos on the far left also lost a bunch of seats although my feeling is that both they and Vox will continue. The PSOE also remain less strong because of the various nationalist groups and that seems set in stone for the moment althoug many did lose some ground last night. Politics here likley will remain volatile for a while yet.

    Oh and yes several polling companies need industrial strength cleaning agents to get a lot eggs off their faces .

    Wouldn't Isabel Diaz Ayuso be a viable alternative as PP leader? Indeed, I'd argue her trouncing of the PSOE at the Madrid elections kick-started the PP revival elsewhere but Moreno is of course a strong proven candidate.

    As I understand it, on the first ballot in the Cortes, you need a majority (176) but on the second vote it's only a Simple majority so it may be Feijoo fails at the first hurdle but gets over the second. IF he fails the second, I think a second election will be inevitable but I don't think that will happen.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 16,544
    Foxy said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    Gove has always been pretty good at identifying the problems that need solving; it's his solutions and their implimentation that tend to be unconvincing-to-hopeless.

    With a bit of luck, the overlap between this and what Starmer has said about housing is substantial enough to be useful.
    Looking forward to him at Health...
    At this stage, you could do a lot worse. And I mean a lot worse. (Seriously. I'd be more than happy to have him back at Education. Mature, eye-to-his-obituary Gove is very different to the bumptious Gove of 2010.)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 47,731

    Foxy said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    Gove has always been pretty good at identifying the problems that need solving; it's his solutions and their implimentation that tend to be unconvincing-to-hopeless.

    With a bit of luck, the overlap between this and what Starmer has said about housing is substantial enough to be useful.
    Looking forward to him at Health...
    At this stage, you could do a lot worse. And I mean a lot worse. (Seriously. I'd be more than happy to have him back at Education. Mature, eye-to-his-obituary Gove is very different to the bumptious Gove of 2010.)
    Gove would be a step up from Barclay, Braverman a step down.

    There aren't any great options in this cabinet, just bad, very bad, and appalling.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,003
    edited July 2023
    stodge said:

    felix said:


    Sanchez hopes to win on the second round Congress vote where only a simple majority is needed. Estimates suggest 171 v 170! But he'd be unlikely to survive long without granting a Catalan independence vote. In addition the Senate now has an absolute majoirtiy for PP which could cause problems with any, but especially, constitutional changes. It does ssem that Autumn elections are likely. I'm not convinced that Sanchez' triumphalist speech last night will go down well with the public. He was a clear second after all.

    On the other hand PP failed to seal the deal and it's possible that Feijoo may resign at some point with the current Andalucian President Juanma Moreno taking over. He won an absolute majority in Andalucía barely 2 years ago. He is popular, centrist and has the beating of both Vox and PSOE here in the south.

    Finally SUMAR who replaced Podemos on the far left also lost a bunch of seats although my feeling is that both they and Vox will continue. The PSOE also remain less strong because of the various nationalist groups and that seems set in stone for the moment althoug many did lose some ground last night. Politics here likley will remain volatile for a while yet.

    Oh and yes several polling companies need industrial strength cleaning agents to get a lot eggs off their faces .

    Wouldn't Isabel Diaz Ayuso be a viable alternative as PP leader? Indeed, I'd argue her trouncing of the PSOE at the Madrid elections kick-started the PP revival elsewhere but Moreno is of course a strong proven candidate.

    As I understand it, on the first ballot in the Cortes, you need a majority (176) but on the second vote it's only a Simple majority so it may be Feijoo fails at the first hurdle but gets over the second. IF he fails the second, I think a second election will be inevitable but I don't think that will happen.
    Ayuso is more hard right than Moreno + Feijoo + may lose centrists the latter won
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,757
    Pagan2 said:

    Count binface being elected mayor frankly would be a good thing. For 1 thing I doubt he would do any worse than the previous incumbents and secondly it would send a strong message to politicians....stop being clowns or we will just elect clowns

    Right now, I’d vote Binface for mayor.
    Definitely better than the mad Tory they’ve picked, and quite possibly an improvement on Khan.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,551
    ...
    HYUFD said:

    I'm surprised that the Tories' magnificent victory in Uxbridge hasn't led to any boost for them in today's R&W poll.

    Still, I guess it's just a matter of time until ULEZ revulsion spreads nationwide and destroys Labour's narrow lead.

    It will be an issue in the M25 belt however
    Is it a lagging factor? Rishi and Suella have both tacitly disowned the 2030 ICE ban. Rishi demonstrated his utter contempt for this socialism by taking a helicopter to Birmingham earlier today.
  • pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,551
    edited July 2023
    HYUFD said:

    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20

    Rishi has had a very good ten days. Starmer on the other hand has had a shocker.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    Nigelb said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Count binface being elected mayor frankly would be a good thing. For 1 thing I doubt he would do any worse than the previous incumbents and secondly it would send a strong message to politicians....stop being clowns or we will just elect clowns

    Right now, I’d vote Binface for mayor.
    Definitely better than the mad Tory they’ve picked, and quite possibly an improvement on Khan.
    I have no objection to a mad Tory running London because

    a) it is at the other end of the country, and
    b) anything that tarnishes the current Tories is fine by me.

    It is just a pity that Labour appear to be so featureless and lackluster
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455

    Nigelb said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Count binface being elected mayor frankly would be a good thing. For 1 thing I doubt he would do any worse than the previous incumbents and secondly it would send a strong message to politicians....stop being clowns or we will just elect clowns

    Right now, I’d vote Binface for mayor.
    Definitely better than the mad Tory they’ve picked, and quite possibly an improvement on Khan.
    I have no objection to a mad Tory running London because

    a) it is at the other end of the country, and
    b) anything that tarnishes the current Tories is fine by me.

    It is just a pity that Labour appear to be so featureless and lackluster
    Also a shame about the babies. And everyone else who has to breathe the air.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,003

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    Foxy said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    Gove has always been pretty good at identifying the problems that need solving; it's his solutions and their implimentation that tend to be unconvincing-to-hopeless.

    With a bit of luck, the overlap between this and what Starmer has said about housing is substantial enough to be useful.
    Looking forward to him at Health...
    Surely Gove will join Labour's housing team after the election? :wink:
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    edited July 2023
    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
    You think there is such a thing as a "brownbelt" (your word) in places such as Oxford and Cambridge? We're not in Detroit.
  • stodgestodge Posts: 13,643

    HYUFD said:

    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20

    Rishi has had a very good ten days. Starmer on the other hand has had a shocker.
    And yet to change is +1 for Sunak and no change for Starmer so notions of a "very good 10 days" and a "shocker" would seem a shade hyperbolic. Perhaps if you follow every warp and weft of politics that's how it seems but of course the vast majority aren't like us.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 21,056

    ...

    HYUFD said:

    I'm surprised that the Tories' magnificent victory in Uxbridge hasn't led to any boost for them in today's R&W poll.

    Still, I guess it's just a matter of time until ULEZ revulsion spreads nationwide and destroys Labour's narrow lead.

    It will be an issue in the M25 belt however
    Is it a lagging factor? Rishi and Suella have both tacitly disowned the 2030 ICE ban. Rishi demonstrated his utter contempt for this socialism by taking a helicopter to Birmingham earlier today.
    If they didn't want to do it, why did they introduce it?
  • HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
    Except they're not even doing that. They're saying build brownbelt if NIMBYs are ok with it. Which they're not.

    Making a choice to prioritise an area and removing NIMBYs having a say in that area alone would be something, even if the greenbelt had still needed permission, it wouldn't be enough but would be a step. But they're not doing that. They're doing nothing.

    PS For the infiniteth time, I wouldn't build "all over" the greenbelt as there's no demand for that. You'd need a billion people in this country to have that much demand.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 4,766

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    As usual with any government programme, you'll get a surplus of the wrong type of housing - tiny rabbit hutches, which are already difficult to sell in many city centres - and a shortage of the stuff people actually want - decent-sized houses with enough space. Politically it makes a lot of sense to dump all the new dwellings in Labour-voting inner cities. The tiny flats that will be built will doubtless be tomorrow's slums, and many of them probably demolished after a few decades, like the 60s tower blocks.

  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    edited July 2023
    Carnyx said:

    Nigelb said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Count binface being elected mayor frankly would be a good thing. For 1 thing I doubt he would do any worse than the previous incumbents and secondly it would send a strong message to politicians....stop being clowns or we will just elect clowns

    Right now, I’d vote Binface for mayor.
    Definitely better than the mad Tory they’ve picked, and quite possibly an improvement on Khan.
    I have no objection to a mad Tory running London because

    a) it is at the other end of the country, and
    b) anything that tarnishes the current Tories is fine by me.

    It is just a pity that Labour appear to be so featureless and lackluster
    Also a shame about the babies. And everyone else who has to breathe the air.
    Indeed, but I do not get a vote so I might as well be blasé about it...

    I would be very happy to see the Tory lose.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 16,962

    HYUFD said:

    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20

    Rishi has had a very good ten days. Starmer on the other hand has had a shocker.
    Rishi has had an excellent ten days losing two of his safest seats and coming inches to losing a third.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627

    Foxy said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    Gove has always been pretty good at identifying the problems that need solving; it's his solutions and their implimentation that tend to be unconvincing-to-hopeless.

    With a bit of luck, the overlap between this and what Starmer has said about housing is substantial enough to be useful.
    Looking forward to him at Health...
    Surely Gove will join Labour's housing team after the election? :wink:
    He's not worth it even at a knockdown price.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,761
    Fishing said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    As usual with any government programme, you'll get a surplus of the wrong type of housing - tiny rabbit hutches, which are already difficult to sell in many city centres - and a shortage of the stuff people actually want - decent-sized houses with enough space. Politically it makes a lot of sense to dump all the new dwellings in Labour-voting inner cities. The tiny flats that will be built will doubtless be tomorrow's slums, and many of them probably demolished after a few decades, like the 60s tower blocks.

    Building in inner cities has the advantages that extra shopping, leisure and public transport doesn’t need to be provided, because it’s already there.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,551
    viewcode said:

    ...

    HYUFD said:

    I'm surprised that the Tories' magnificent victory in Uxbridge hasn't led to any boost for them in today's R&W poll.

    Still, I guess it's just a matter of time until ULEZ revulsion spreads nationwide and destroys Labour's narrow lead.

    It will be an issue in the M25 belt however
    Is it a lagging factor? Rishi and Suella have both tacitly disowned the 2030 ICE ban. Rishi demonstrated his utter contempt for this socialism by taking a helicopter to Birmingham earlier today.
    If they didn't want to do it, why did they introduce it?
    But the voters don't realise that. They think it is Communism and Rishi can save them from it.

    Mind you, with Netanyahu and Trump looking at becoming post- democracy autocrats, perhaps it is something the Conservatives should look at. Suella would fit that frame nicely, come the day.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 16,544
    viewcode said:

    ...

    HYUFD said:

    I'm surprised that the Tories' magnificent victory in Uxbridge hasn't led to any boost for them in today's R&W poll.

    Still, I guess it's just a matter of time until ULEZ revulsion spreads nationwide and destroys Labour's narrow lead.

    It will be an issue in the M25 belt however
    Is it a lagging factor? Rishi and Suella have both tacitly disowned the 2030 ICE ban. Rishi demonstrated his utter contempt for this socialism by taking a helicopter to Birmingham earlier today.
    If they didn't want to do it, why did they introduce it?
    Presumably, they didn't, or have convinced themselves they didn't.

    (Checks- it was introduced in November 2020.) There you go. It was that bounder Johnson, probably under the influence of that mad girlfriend of his. And he's not even a Conservative MP any more.

    There's a wider point here. There have been so many Conservative Prime Ministers since 2010, and they have all put so much effort into undoing the legacy of their predecessor, that it's not actually surprising that collectively they have got so little done.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627

    Foxy said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    Gove has always been pretty good at identifying the problems that need solving; it's his solutions and their implimentation that tend to be unconvincing-to-hopeless.

    With a bit of luck, the overlap between this and what Starmer has said about housing is substantial enough to be useful.
    Looking forward to him at Health...
    At this stage, you could do a lot worse. And I mean a lot worse. (Seriously. I'd be more than happy to have him back at Education. Mature, eye-to-his-obituary Gove is very different to the bumptious Gove of 2010.)
    The truly disturbing thing about that sentence is that he still is a swivel eyed loon - and he's still one of the better options compared to Mogg, Dorries, Braverman, Raab, Zahawi, Williamson, Patel...
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    Gove has always been pretty good at identifying the problems that need solving; it's his solutions and their implimentation that tend to be unconvincing-to-hopeless.

    With a bit of luck, the overlap between this and what Starmer has said about housing is substantial enough to be useful.
    Looking forward to him at Health...
    At this stage, you could do a lot worse. And I mean a lot worse. (Seriously. I'd be more than happy to have him back at Education. Mature, eye-to-his-obituary Gove is very different to the bumptious Gove of 2010.)
    The truly disturbing thing about that sentence is that he still is a swivel eyed loon - and he's still one of the better options compared to Mogg, Dorries, Braverman, Raab, Zahawi, Williamson, Patel...
    The bottom of my shoe is better than any of that lot
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 70,627
    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20

    Rishi has had a very good ten days. Starmer on the other hand has had a shocker.
    Rishi has had an excellent ten days losing two of his safest seats and coming inches to losing a third.
    Uxbridge was not one of his safest seats.

    That's the point, really.

    However, Michael Foot had two spectacular holds against the odds in Warrington and Darlington and it did him sod all good at the general election.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,003
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
    You think there is such a thing as a "brownbelt" (your word) in places such as Oxford and Cambridge? We're not in Detroit.
    Yes, both cities of over 100,000 people
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 27,676
    edited July 2023

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Honestly, Suella Braverman is a naughty word that gets you banned from PB.

    The home secretary acted unlawfully in failing to provide basic support to asylum seekers, including young children and pregnant women, a judge has ruled.

    Suella Braverman must introduce changes that will benefit thousands of asylum seekers after five successfully challenged the home secretary in the high court.

    Three of the claimants brought proceedings over delays in providing financial support while two challenged over failures to provide cash payments to pregnant women and to children under three years old.

    In his ruling, Mr Justice Swift found that the home secretary broke the law in withholding payments of £3 a week to provide healthy food for children aged one to three and to pregnant women.


    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/jul/24/suella-braverman-acted-unlawfully-over-asylum-seekers-judge-rules

    Its just disgusting. To treat people who are so vulnerable and limited in what they can do for themselves so badly for such small sums. The fact that it is not shocking is the most depressing thing about it.
    It says so much about Rishi Sunak.
    That she is still in office? Yes, and none of it good I am afraid.
    Indeed.
    Reading the judge's verdict, the Home Secretary's defence is that along with full-board, the additional requirements referred to are provided in kind (fruit, vitamins, nappies etc.) via the Government's contracts with accommodation providers, and that this meets the requirement. Obviously the judge doesn't agree, so the payments (for thousands of people) will have to be provided. I would expect legal professionals to actually read what the judge said rather than grabbing the nearest pitchfork.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 27,676
    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20

    Rishi has had a very good ten days. Starmer on the other hand has had a shocker.
    Rishi has had an excellent ten days losing two of his safest seats and coming inches to losing a third.
    For Sunak, that is a good 10 days.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,757
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
    You think there is such a thing as a "brownbelt" (your word) in places such as Oxford and Cambridge? We're not in Detroit.
    Not off to a good start.
    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/24/tory-mp-anthony-browne-michael-gove-cambridge-housing-development-planning
  • EPGEPG Posts: 6,637
    Fishing said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    As usual with any government programme, you'll get a surplus of the wrong type of housing - tiny rabbit hutches, which are already difficult to sell in many city centres - and a shortage of the stuff people actually want - decent-sized houses with enough space. Politically it makes a lot of sense to dump all the new dwellings in Labour-voting inner cities. The tiny flats that will be built will doubtless be tomorrow's slums, and many of them probably demolished after a few decades, like the 60s tower blocks.

    While "people" of course want as much stuff as they can get, in practice the size of households has dropped due to fewer kids and more separations, so of course the size of the new builds has to drop because the market is saturated with old draughty 4+ bed dwellings.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163

    Fishing said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    As usual with any government programme, you'll get a surplus of the wrong type of housing - tiny rabbit hutches, which are already difficult to sell in many city centres - and a shortage of the stuff people actually want - decent-sized houses with enough space. Politically it makes a lot of sense to dump all the new dwellings in Labour-voting inner cities. The tiny flats that will be built will doubtless be tomorrow's slums, and many of them probably demolished after a few decades, like the 60s tower blocks.

    Building in inner cities has the advantages that extra shopping, leisure and public transport doesn’t need to be provided, because it’s already there.
    It also has the advantages that you can probably walk to work or restaurants or pubs, etc. Putting people back into town centres is badly needed.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366
    edited July 2023
    Despite all the free PR from the likes of the BBC, seems Leon might have called it right...

    People are seemingly turning their back on Meta’s Threads nearly as fast as they flocked to it.

    A report in the Wall Street Journal, citing data from Sensor Tower, says the number of daily active users is now down 70% from its peak on July 7, with just 13 million actively engaging with the platform.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mark-zuckerberg-threads-traffic-now-144913170.html

    All back to people tweeting on on X about how they are on Mastodon....
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,379
    ydoethur said:

    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20

    Rishi has had a very good ten days. Starmer on the other hand has had a shocker.
    Rishi has had an excellent ten days losing two of his safest seats and coming inches to losing a third.
    Uxbridge was not one of his safest seats.

    That's the point, really.

    However, Michael Foot had two spectacular holds against the odds in Warrington and Darlington and it did him sod all good at the general election.
    I am not really sure what a couple of by elections over 40 years ago can tell us about the current situation.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 68,757
    .

    Despite all the free PR from the likes of the BBC, seems Leon might have called it right...

    People are seemingly turning their back on Meta’s Threads nearly as fast as they flocked to it.

    Because it’s shit.

    Lesson there for X - users aren’t captive, so their unlikely plans remain unlikely.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,003
    ydoethur said:

    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20

    Rishi has had a very good ten days. Starmer on the other hand has had a shocker.
    Rishi has had an excellent ten days losing two of his safest seats and coming inches to losing a third.
    Uxbridge was not one of his safest seats.

    That's the point, really.

    However, Michael Foot had two spectacular holds against the odds in Warrington and Darlington and it did him sod all good at the general election.
    He beat the SDP by 2% to keep Labour 2nd
  • pm215pm215 Posts: 1,091

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    Those quotes are Sunak rowing back on things rather than Gove (not that that makes for much confidence in anything happening). Full speech here if you want it:
    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/long-term-plan-for-housing-secretary-of-states-speech

    One bit in there I'd missed is "proposals for ‘street votes’ – where local communities can collectively decide to extend their homes to capture more value and to create more space for new householders or bigger families" -- which I've seen advocated as an anti-nimby approach where you keep the radius of who is consulted small, so it has all the people who benefit from "now I have a house with planning permission for a valuable extra storey / am being compensated for this change" and their voices aren't diluted out by everybody else in a 5 mile radius being generically anti-development. Devil in the details, as always.

  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 27,551

    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20

    Rishi has had a very good ten days. Starmer on the other hand has had a shocker.
    Rishi has had an excellent ten days losing two of his safest seats and coming inches to losing a third.
    For Sunak, that is a good 10 days.
    Don't be a ***! Inflation is down. Big win on the boat people, big win on the boat people floating prison, big win in Uxbridge (everyone has already forgotten Selby and Frome). Big climate win today over ICE. All the while Starmer has tied his shoelaces together and is dying on his **** at every step.

    Rishi is a superb politician! It's a shame he is running the Conservative Party.
  • FairlieredFairliered Posts: 4,761

    Fishing said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    As usual with any government programme, you'll get a surplus of the wrong type of housing - tiny rabbit hutches, which are already difficult to sell in many city centres - and a shortage of the stuff people actually want - decent-sized houses with enough space. Politically it makes a lot of sense to dump all the new dwellings in Labour-voting inner cities. The tiny flats that will be built will doubtless be tomorrow's slums, and many of them probably demolished after a few decades, like the 60s tower blocks.

    Building in inner cities has the advantages that extra shopping, leisure and public transport doesn’t need to be provided, because it’s already there.
    It also has the advantages that you can probably walk to work or restaurants or pubs, etc. Putting people back into town centres is badly needed.
    A form of shared equity or 100% mortgages would allow young people to get on the property ladder, even if it’s a small flat in a town centre. It would hopefully be less costly than renting. When they are ready to move to a larger property further away from the centre, they will have an asset that can be sold to the next tranche of young people. There would need to be a condition of sale preventing landlords buying the property in order to keep the process going.
  • pm215 said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    Those quotes are Sunak rowing back on things rather than Gove (not that that makes for much confidence in anything happening). Full speech here if you want it:
    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/long-term-plan-for-housing-secretary-of-states-speech

    One bit in there I'd missed is "proposals for ‘street votes’ – where local communities can collectively decide to extend their homes to capture more value and to create more space for new householders or bigger families" -- which I've seen advocated as an anti-nimby approach where you keep the radius of who is consulted small, so it has all the people who benefit from "now I have a house with planning permission for a valuable extra storey / am being compensated for this change" and their voices aren't diluted out by everybody else in a 5 mile radius being generically anti-development. Devil in the details, as always.

    An anti NIMBY measure would be to not ask NIMBYs what they think.

    Set requirements and standards. If those are mst, development or extensions happen. If not, they don't.

    If your neighbour wants to shop at McDonalds you don't get a say on that. If your neighbour wants an extension, you shouldn't get a say on that either.
  • Beibheirli_CBeibheirli_C Posts: 8,163

    Fishing said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    As usual with any government programme, you'll get a surplus of the wrong type of housing - tiny rabbit hutches, which are already difficult to sell in many city centres - and a shortage of the stuff people actually want - decent-sized houses with enough space. Politically it makes a lot of sense to dump all the new dwellings in Labour-voting inner cities. The tiny flats that will be built will doubtless be tomorrow's slums, and many of them probably demolished after a few decades, like the 60s tower blocks.

    Building in inner cities has the advantages that extra shopping, leisure and public transport doesn’t need to be provided, because it’s already there.
    It also has the advantages that you can probably walk to work or restaurants or pubs, etc. Putting people back into town centres is badly needed.
    A form of shared equity or 100% mortgages would allow young people to get on the property ladder, even if it’s a small flat in a town centre. It would hopefully be less costly than renting. When they are ready to move to a larger property further away from the centre, they will have an asset that can be sold to the next tranche of young people. There would need to be a condition of sale preventing landlords buying the property in order to keep the process going.
    Now that my kids are grown, I went the other way and sold my house in the suburbs and bought a city-centre flat.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,162
    edited July 2023
    Gove’s policies are to be welcomed, so much as I can see, but they still amount to a top down, frankly soviet approach to planning.

    The five year plan has decided to build lab space in Cambridge, great!

    My family home is in a conservation area, but is comparatively low rise despite being less than two miles from Bank. Wake me up when I can turn a 2000sqft property on a full size property into 3500sqft set of apartments without the mother of all planning nightmares.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 31,358
    Anyone thinking of putting the central heating on tonight?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 31,358

    Despite all the free PR from the likes of the BBC, seems Leon might have called it right...

    People are seemingly turning their back on Meta’s Threads nearly as fast as they flocked to it.

    A report in the Wall Street Journal, citing data from Sensor Tower, says the number of daily active users is now down 70% from its peak on July 7, with just 13 million actively engaging with the platform.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mark-zuckerberg-threads-traffic-now-144913170.html

    All back to people tweeting on on X about how they are on Mastodon....

    Is "tweeting on X" the correct formulation? lol.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 80,366
    edited July 2023
    Andy_JS said:

    Despite all the free PR from the likes of the BBC, seems Leon might have called it right...

    People are seemingly turning their back on Meta’s Threads nearly as fast as they flocked to it.

    A report in the Wall Street Journal, citing data from Sensor Tower, says the number of daily active users is now down 70% from its peak on July 7, with just 13 million actively engaging with the platform.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mark-zuckerberg-threads-traffic-now-144913170.html

    All back to people tweeting on on X about how they are on Mastodon....

    Is "tweeting on X" the correct formulation? lol.
    Are we all to be X-ing from now on? Or Crossing?
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,269
    Andy_JS said:

    Anyone thinking of putting the central heating on tonight?

    No. It's a lovely evening here.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 121,003
    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
    You think there is such a thing as a "brownbelt" (your word) in places such as Oxford and Cambridge? We're not in Detroit.
    Yes, both cities of over 100,000 people
    Completely missing the point.

    Show us on a map where this "brownbelt" is. We'd all love to know so we can rush to buy this land everyone else has missed.
    Up, high rise for starters. Derelict land too. Even 53% of Scots oppose allowing more housing to be built on Green Belt land
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/05/17/d5ba5/1
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 31,358
    Decision Desk

    "Democrats Have a Wisconsin Demographic Problem I DDHQ State Overview"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qzh0-6A1cs
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,650
    Cyclefree said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Anyone thinking of putting the central heating on tonight?

    No. It's a lovely evening here.

    I flew home *to Scotland* from a ludicrously sweaty Spain earlier. Heating? Naah - it's lovely out there. Went out mowing in a t-shirt.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,379
    pm215 said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    Those quotes are Sunak rowing back on things rather than Gove (not that that makes for much confidence in anything happening). Full speech here if you want it:
    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/long-term-plan-for-housing-secretary-of-states-speech

    One bit in there I'd missed is "proposals for ‘street votes’ – where local communities can collectively decide to extend their homes to capture more value and to create more space for new householders or bigger families" -- which I've seen advocated as an anti-nimby approach where you keep the radius of who is consulted small, so it has all the people who benefit from "now I have a house with planning permission for a valuable extra storey / am being compensated for this change" and their voices aren't diluted out by everybody else in a 5 mile radius being generically anti-development. Devil in the details, as always.

    AIUI the objections received to planning applications count for nothing unless they cite planning law and/or the LA's Local Plan. However, the Local Plan usually gives plenty of ammunition for objectors.

    As an example of how stupid Local Plans can be the current plan for North Dorset lists 33 villages that are no longer considered to be settlements for planning purposes but which are treated as open countryside, thus no development can take place. As a consequence most of these villages are slowly dying since they are not big enough to sustain a shop, pub, school, church or indeed any meaningful community. This is the triumph of Nimbyism.
  • SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 17,274
    carnforth said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Despite all the free PR from the likes of the BBC, seems Leon might have called it right...

    People are seemingly turning their back on Meta’s Threads nearly as fast as they flocked to it.

    A report in the Wall Street Journal, citing data from Sensor Tower, says the number of daily active users is now down 70% from its peak on July 7, with just 13 million actively engaging with the platform.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mark-zuckerberg-threads-traffic-now-144913170.html

    All back to people tweeting on on X about how they are on Mastodon....

    Is "tweeting on X" the correct formulation? lol.
    Some wag suggested Xcreting.
    People laughed when Coke came out with "New Coke".

    Now Musk has nixed global trademark in favor of the most generic alternative possible. As in, Brand X.

    Perhaps Coca-Cola would've had better luck IF they'd named their "New" concoction "It"?
  • HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
    You think there is such a thing as a "brownbelt" (your word) in places such as Oxford and Cambridge? We're not in Detroit.
    Yes, both cities of over 100,000 people
    Completely missing the point.

    Show us on a map where this "brownbelt" is. We'd all love to know so we can rush to buy this land everyone else has missed.
    Up, high rise for starters. Derelict land too. Even 53% of Scots oppose allowing more housing to be built on Green Belt land
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/05/17/d5ba5/1
    What derelict land? Where? Can you point to it or is it just a fiction of your imagination?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455
    edited July 2023
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
    You think there is such a thing as a "brownbelt" (your word) in places such as Oxford and Cambridge? We're not in Detroit.
    Yes, both cities of over 100,000 people
    Completely missing the point.

    Show us on a map where this "brownbelt" is. We'd all love to know so we can rush to buy this land everyone else has missed.
    Up, high rise for starters. Derelict land too. Even 53% of Scots oppose allowing more housing to be built on Green Belt land
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/05/17/d5ba5/1
    Building up is building. It's what yfou build *on* that we are talking about. Your wording is talking aboiut whole belts of derelict and used land. Where are they?

    Andz that's not "51% of Scots", but 51% of a subsample with a large DK element of a larger sample.

    In any case, it doesn't matter of 0% or 100% oppose [edit] green belt building, if there is no "brownbelt".

    Again - where is this huge brownbelt around Cambridge or Oxford, Mr Expert from Epping?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,379

    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20

    Rishi has had a very good ten days. Starmer on the other hand has had a shocker.
    Rishi has had an excellent ten days losing two of his safest seats and coming inches to losing a third.
    For Sunak, that is a good 10 days.
    Don't be a ***! Inflation is down. Big win on the boat people, big win on the boat people floating prison, big win in Uxbridge (everyone has already forgotten Selby and Frome). Big climate win today over ICE. All the while Starmer has tied his shoelaces together and is dying on his **** at every step.

    Rishi is a superb politician! It's a shame he is running the Conservative Party.
    One can tire of too much irony tbh.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 42,455

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
    You think there is such a thing as a "brownbelt" (your word) in places such as Oxford and Cambridge? We're not in Detroit.
    Yes, both cities of over 100,000 people
    Completely missing the point.

    Show us on a map where this "brownbelt" is. We'd all love to know so we can rush to buy this land everyone else has missed.
    Up, high rise for starters. Derelict land too. Even 53% of Scots oppose allowing more housing to be built on Green Belt land
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/05/17/d5ba5/1
    What derelict land? Where? Can you point to it or is it just a fiction of your imagination?
    Oh, he's just pretending to defend a Tory guff that pretends to be a policy that pretends to be meaningful and rational.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,849

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    PSG accept the £259m bid for Mbappé from Al Hilal.

    He’s really going to play in SAUDI ARABIA for a year?

    It’s rare that I agree with @kinabalu - but I do here. It’s great for bantz but there is also something melancholy about it

    One of the world’s greatest athletes in the world’s greatest sport is gonna become a performing seal in a billionaire’s sporting circus

    IF this happens. Mbappe might tell ‘em to fuck off. Go on, Kylian
    I wonder how much footballers dream of winning the FA Cup these days as opposed to signing a contract at Mercenary Utd.

    I don't understand what the Saudis intend to do long term, though. They can buy some playthings for a short while but it isn't going to change anyone's view of the place, surely?
    Way back in the mists of time when Serie A and Primera Liga were the big leagues that everyone watched in the world the Premier League got excited by singing a few big name players - the likes of Juergen Klinsmann, Gianluca Vialli and Ruud Gullit. They weren’t at the peak of their careers but they brought a bit of style and stardom.

    Then when the Man City project got going they bought Robinho as a big star.

    Gradually these smallish statements were added to and as the Premier League got super savvy with selling global tv rights now that the product was a mix of good fun football and stars they made huge money which enabled more stars and because the money was great for players and stars had started arriving more stars went to the EPL and the Spanish and Italian leagues started disappearing in the rear view mirror.

    The Saudi league will start being a popular view in a lot of Asia, South America and Africa and the Saudis won’t charge a lot for rights which will make it attractive to broadcasters so people get to see some big names playing that they recognise - much like the Premier league when it started to take off. And then the cycle continues, more top coaches and players will go, not just in the twilight of their careers, and you will possibly end up with a de-facto super league where everyone in the world can choose their new team based on their players with no old loyalties to their local clubs getting in the way.

    They will get the World Cup too and no doubt an offer to host FIFA HQ and then job is done.
    No. Not going to happen

    Why? Because the EPL was in a unique position to take over the top spot of club football leagues. It has the pedigree, the history and the supporters. If you talk to people abroad who really follow English football, this means an enormous amount to them. By supporting Villa or Spurs or Liverpool or Man U or - God knows -Wrexham! - they are buying into an ancient story, a 100 year old club with its bloodlines and taboos, its history of triumphs and disasters. This is absorbed and becomes emotionally meaningful

    You cannot confect this out of nothing (and it doesn’t help if your language is Arabic not English)

    This is exactly why French luxury goods sell so well. L’Oreal to Chanel to Louis Vuitton to French wine, fashion and cognac. They have a pedigree, A cachet which absolutely cannot be replicated. A Chinese company could start selling perfume or moisturiser “technically superior” to Chanel but Jeez it would have to be incredibly superior to get people buying Xi Biang number 9 not Chanel number 5. And it won’t be superior coz in the end it is just perfume. A pong

    English/British sports have the cachet of French luxury goods. The history and pedigree

    For the same reason, Saudi cannot actually replace the Masters, or the Open at St Andrews. They can BUY a form of control, but that is different
    This is right. Export goods for the global market have in them an essence of that country's character, or perceptions of character. They have to, to succeed. It's not just the intrinsic product itself but the emotion that the consumer gains from it; the culture they're buying in to. And you can't manufacture that out of nothing.
    Janan Ganesh did an excellent article on this. On how Europe - especially France and Italy - essentially make a living from selling “Europe” as a posh brand, to everyone else

    In the end a handbag is a bloody handbag, but slap Chanel or Gucci on it, and it becomes something better. And LVMH is one of the biggest consumer companies in the world, thereby

    Britain is capitalising on the cachet we have in sports: coz we invented them all

    You can, however, create cachet in new forms of consumer goods. Apple is an example. When a rare example of a first gen iPhone sells for $100,000 (which it recently did) then the Apple brand has clearly become the tech equivalent of a Grand Cru label
    The trouble is we are not sexy. There is still an element of cool though, think about the Union Jack. What we are is sold, old reliable Britain. Sound finance, property rights, legal justice. If you're looking for a one night stand go to France or Italy. If you're looking for a solid partner for the next 40 years, nothing fancy, basic food, bad weather, warm beer, come to Britain.
    Disagree. We are sexy but in a different way
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5vsANcS4Ml8
    This way?

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-kiLApX8FbQ&pp=ygUbZ2lsYmVydCBzdWxsaXZhbiBlbmdsaXNobWFu
  • MiklosvarMiklosvar Posts: 1,855

    FF43 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Starmer 43% Sunak 35% on who would be the better Prime Minister
    https://twitter.com/RedfieldWilton/status/1683514941213483027?s=20

    Rishi has had a very good ten days. Starmer on the other hand has had a shocker.
    Rishi has had an excellent ten days losing two of his safest seats and coming inches to losing a third.
    For Sunak, that is a good 10 days.
    Don't be a ***! Inflation is down. Big win on the boat people, big win on the boat people floating prison, big win in Uxbridge (everyone has already forgotten Selby and Frome). Big climate win today over ICE. All the while Starmer has tied his shoelaces together and is dying on his **** at every step.

    Rishi is a superb politician! It's a shame he is running the Conservative Party.
    One can tire of too much irony tbh.
    Sure. "Starmer has tied his shoelaces together and is dying on his **** at every step" is pure "I am a camera" reportage though, whatever one thinks of his politics or his opponents.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,358

    carnforth said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Despite all the free PR from the likes of the BBC, seems Leon might have called it right...

    People are seemingly turning their back on Meta’s Threads nearly as fast as they flocked to it.

    A report in the Wall Street Journal, citing data from Sensor Tower, says the number of daily active users is now down 70% from its peak on July 7, with just 13 million actively engaging with the platform.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mark-zuckerberg-threads-traffic-now-144913170.html

    All back to people tweeting on on X about how they are on Mastodon....

    Is "tweeting on X" the correct formulation? lol.
    Some wag suggested Xcreting.
    People laughed when Coke came out with "New Coke".

    Now Musk has nixed global trademark in favor of the most generic alternative possible. As in, Brand X.

    Perhaps Coca-Cola would've had better luck IF they'd named their "New" concoction "It"?
    There is some suggestion tonight that Elon doesn't own the trademark to use X on a social media platform. Meta does...

    Also noted on Twitter tonight, why does the X logo smell of Lynx Africa?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,358
    @PopBase

    San Francisco Police shuts down operation to remove Twitter’s name from X headquarters as Elon Musk reportedly didn’t get permit for all the equipment on the street.

    https://twitter.com/PopBase/status/1683571635419480069?s=20
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    Scott_xP said:

    @PopBase

    San Francisco Police shuts down operation to remove Twitter’s name from X headquarters as Elon Musk reportedly didn’t get permit for all the equipment on the street.

    https://twitter.com/PopBase/status/1683571635419480069?s=20

    Rules are for other people, stop trying to stop genius!
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,272

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
    You think there is such a thing as a "brownbelt" (your word) in places such as Oxford and Cambridge? We're not in Detroit.
    Yes, both cities of over 100,000 people
    Completely missing the point.

    Show us on a map where this "brownbelt" is. We'd all love to know so we can rush to buy this land everyone else has missed.
    Up, high rise for starters. Derelict land too. Even 53% of Scots oppose allowing more housing to be built on Green Belt land
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/05/17/d5ba5/1
    What derelict land? Where? Can you point to it or is it just a fiction of your imagination?
    The whole point of derelict land (and there's a lot of it round here), is that it isn't derelict for no reason.
    It's derelict because nobody wants to use it. Nor can see a profit in it either.
    Or else it wouldn't be derelict.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 94,977
    edited July 2023
    dixiedean said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    HYUFD said:

    pm215 said:

    Did we do Gove's speech about housing? https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66287810

    As a definitely-non-Tory-supporter, my take:

    * it's good to see that Gove seems to favour basically the right thing (more houses, fast, with infrastructure)
    * it's easy to be sceptical about how much will actually happen and whether the promised public transport network will actually be good (as opposed to "pay stagecoach a wodge of cash to run three extra buses")
    * nimbys already out in force, I see
    * it's hard to see it getting beyond "consultants spend a few million on 'vision' documents" before the govt gets chucked out in 2024 and Labour throws it all out and does something else anyway...

    It's meaningless nonsense.

    "He added that developments would be done "in dialogue with local communities" and that Westminster should not "ride roughshod" over their views."

    Total NIMBYs charter. Their views should not be a factor whatsoever in whether new homes get built. Especially when it comes to converting existing developments.
    We know you would concrete all over the greenbelt whatever residents views but Rishi + Gove are right to focus building on brownbelt areas first
    You think there is such a thing as a "brownbelt" (your word) in places such as Oxford and Cambridge? We're not in Detroit.
    Yes, both cities of over 100,000 people
    Completely missing the point.

    Show us on a map where this "brownbelt" is. We'd all love to know so we can rush to buy this land everyone else has missed.
    Up, high rise for starters. Derelict land too. Even 53% of Scots oppose allowing more housing to be built on Green Belt land
    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/05/17/d5ba5/1
    What derelict land? Where? Can you point to it or is it just a fiction of your imagination?
    The whole point of derelict land (and there's a lot of it round here), is that it isn't derelict for no reason.
    It's derelict because nobody wants to use it. Nor can see a profit in it either.
    Or else it wouldn't be derelict.
    You can incentivise, to a degree, and developers lie about how hard things may be sometimes, but it doesn't magically make all issues with sites disappear (and there will be many with very real issues), and if no one comes forward to do it you cannot just make them - yet politicians continually give that impression to their residents.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,157

    Despite all the free PR from the likes of the BBC, seems Leon might have called it right...

    People are seemingly turning their back on Meta’s Threads nearly as fast as they flocked to it.

    A report in the Wall Street Journal, citing data from Sensor Tower, says the number of daily active users is now down 70% from its peak on July 7, with just 13 million actively engaging with the platform.

    https://finance.yahoo.com/news/mark-zuckerberg-threads-traffic-now-144913170.html

    All back to people tweeting on on X about how they are on Mastodon....

    I am glad that is the one he called right. Definitely preferable to nuclear Armageddon or alien invasion.
This discussion has been closed.