I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
No, this government is exhausted and so incompetent it doesn't even realise what many of its successes are.
But Starmer is going to face the impossibility of meeting a myriad of spending demands through 'economic growth'.
Incidentally economic growth includes the public sector increasing output faster than increasing workforce or pay.
A good thing if it happens but I suspect its the opposite of what the public sector unions want from a Labour government.
The UK Government spends more on welfare than it does on the entire public sector combined.
The Tories have sadly replaced Labour as the party of the welfare state. The Tories are spending a higher proportion of state expenditure on welfare today than Labour did in 2010.
Public sector employee output is higher than welfare recipient output is, so a rebalancing certainly could boost productivity.
And we have this welfare spending at a time of full employment.
Too many people are getting too many handouts.
And the danger is that a critical mass of welfare recipients has been achieved which makes it impossible to reform this.
The biggest chunk of welfare spending by far is pensions. The next biggest chunk is supporting low paid workers.
Then you have the disabled and long-term sick. Then far too much subsiding high-rent landlords. Very little spent on people who can work but aren't.
Which is the problem, welfare isn't going to those in need.
Take eg a healthy 70 year old, who could work but doesn't need to, who has a solid private pension, lives rent-free and mortgage-free, and has income from others rent via a property portfolio that doesn't attract NICs ... Do they need triple locked welfare? Is giving them welfare a good use of our taxes?
Or take a young 20 something or 30 something parent, someone who is struggling to make ends meet while paying rent. Who is facing real tax rates of 70-80%. Should they be paying more taxes to support their retired landlords welfare?
Welfare no longer goes to people in need. That's why it's so expensive, and why those in need struggle. It's the worst of both worlds.
Legal pedal assistant bikes are not a problem and should be encouraged and subsidised as they are a great way of getting people into cycling. Electric bikes that don't need pedalling need to be banned, as do those fucking scooters that zip around town centres. Any adult caught riding one should be arrested, fined a grand and the bike crushed in front of them. The police should be free to knock people off them, then reverse over them just to be sure and the bodies left on the road as a warning. Kids riding them should be taken into care. Harsh, but it's the only way.
You're yet another one of those namby-pamby, woke liberals about which one hears too much.
Why don't you realise that this menace won't be crushed unless we burn down their homes, shoot their families, and dance on their graves singing comic songs?
Checkmate. Maybe on one of those chess boards Rishi is allowing councils to bid for.
Phil Collins back in The Times based his whole column on a chess analogy
The slow vanishing of the government as a force for action might just have found its metaphor. In the search for a political character for Rishi Sunak, local authorities have been invited to submit bids to receive £2,500 to buy a chess table and benches. It’s a chequered Cones Hotline. The clock is ticking, the prime minister is in a bind and, just as in a game of chess, he surveys the pieces and reflects that, if the Conservatives are losing badly, it might be because they have played so poorly.
I think this schools thing is really bad - and could be the end of Sunak before the next election. He's in big trouble here. He doesn't look a vote winner at all.
I’m a parent with school-aged kids, a politics nerd and have a particular interest in education, so I’m not a great judge of the extent to which this is cutting through.
My guess is that it’ll blow over as yet another story of this crapola government failing. But it cements (no pun intended) intent and views.
You might be right. I don't have school-aged kids... I do think the drip drip of the ongoing saga of which schools are affected or not keeps this in the news.
Also frankly, I would want some assurances from my school that it's safe before I sent children back.
My 10 year old grandson was playing a game on his computer with a friend on line at the time Hunt was being interviewed on TV yesterday and he suddenly said
'Is my school safe, Papa'
My instant reaction was yes it is, but then as the Welsh Government also have no idea how it effects Welsh schools then it is incumbent on them to tell Welsh parents just how safe their schools are here in Wales
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
No, this government is exhausted and so incompetent it doesn't even realise what many of its successes are.
But Starmer is going to face the impossibility of meeting a myriad of spending demands through 'economic growth'.
Incidentally economic growth includes the public sector increasing output faster than increasing workforce or pay.
A good thing if it happens but I suspect its the opposite of what the public sector unions want from a Labour government.
The UK Government spends more on welfare than it does on the entire public sector combined.
The Tories have sadly replaced Labour as the party of the welfare state. The Tories are spending a higher proportion of state expenditure on welfare today than Labour did in 2010.
Public sector employee output is higher than welfare recipient output is, so a rebalancing certainly could boost productivity.
And we have this welfare spending at a time of full employment.
Too many people are getting too many handouts.
And the danger is that a critical mass of welfare recipients has been achieved which makes it impossible to reform this.
As I have said many times Universal Credit is very generous.
No, it's really not. That's not where the money is going either.
Someone on UC faces a real Income Tax rate of 69.4% ... 78.4% if they are repaying student loans too. That's not generous. And that's excluding Employers NICs.
If you live in rented accommodation with children then UC is very generous. As an example. My frend who is a part time nurse with one child earns £1500 per month, her rent is £800. She gets £920 UC per month plus her child benefit. Her ex husand pays her £320 maintenance. Therefore after her rent and council tax she has £1800 per month to live off. She also gets the £300 cost of living payment every 3-6 months at the moment. She certainly does not struggle to feed her child.
I agree that due to its generosity its hard to come off UC by taking more hours at work.
Legal pedal assistant bikes are not a problem and should be encouraged and subsidised as they are a great way of getting people into cycling. Electric bikes that don't need pedalling need to be banned, as do those fucking scooters that zip around town centres. Any adult caught riding one should be arrested, fined a grand and the bike crushed in front of them. The police should be free to knock people off them, then reverse over them just to be sure and the bodies left on the road as a warning. Kids riding them should be taken into care. Harsh, but it's the only way.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
Legal pedal assistant bikes are not a problem and should be encouraged and subsidised as they are a great way of getting people into cycling. Electric bikes that don't need pedalling need to be banned, as do those fucking scooters that zip around town centres. Any adult caught riding one should be arrested, fined a grand and the bike crushed in front of them. The police should be free to knock people off them, then reverse over them just to be sure and the bodies left on the road as a warning. Kids riding them should be taken into care. Harsh, but it's the only way.
You're yet another one of those namby-pamby, woke liberals about which one hears too much.
Why don't you realise that this menace won't be crushed unless we burn down their homes, shoot their families, and dance on their graves singing comic songs?
One of the things that’s so aggravating about this saga is that if the DfE had acted at the beginning of the summer, all these schools could have had provision in place for the start of term. It’s the incompetence piled on top of everything else that really grates.
Not sure how many political memoirs I've read - must be in the high hundreds given my sad and in some ways inexplicable proclivity for Tory history. But I've never read a better brief description of the archetype than this https://twitter.com/ProfTimBale/status/1698225803018846713
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
There is some logic in that but as the clock ticks down to GE 24, I expect him to come under increasing scrutiny from the media when sitting on the fence will not wash
One unhelpful element of the RAAC issue for the Conservatives is that a lot of schools are still used as polling stations, and a nagging concern that the building is about to collapse on top of voters isn't ideal for a governing party.
Albeit I think there's been a move away from use of school buildings in recent years.
The BBC news site leads with "Sunak halved schools repairs budget in 2021". Might that push Sunak down to Truss levels of unpopularity? It's the perfect exemplar of what's wrong with the Conservative Party's ideology.
I don’t think so. But it’s likely to stymie recovery.
Fact is that Truss was so unpopular not only because her government seemed wilfully reckless with the economy (something that impacts everyone, not just say parents, or patients, or commuters, or retirees) but also because she was so utterly cack handed at presentation. She had the charisma of a wet lettuce and she didn’t even have the personal story/sense of duty/projection of strength to make up for it.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
And that's our problem in a nutshell.
"We've had decades of something for nothing, unfortunately now is when we have to pay that back" may be true, but it will always lose to "it'll be fine, have another bung".
Maybe the best thing for Britain overall is for the Conservatives to spend the next year making things so bad that Starmer can pitch for a Doctor's Mandate and win on that basis.
Beware - just thwarted a very convincing scam on my my bank credit card.
Got a text message (it showed my bank as named so looked proper). It said there was suspicious transactions and a further text will arrive. It did. It said my card had been blocked and that I would receive a phone call from the fraud dept of the bank. Sure enough, two phone calls followed (I didn't answer). I checked my banking App and indeed there were four transactions today for Apple.Com ranging from Nil value to £10 - not mine.
I Googled the bank fraud number and called from a different phone to which the texts came in. It is a fraud and my card is being cancelled and a new one issued.
Bullet dodged - but it is very concerning that the scammer had my credit card number and my mobile number. I suppose I could change my mobile number but this would be a nuisance.
The BBC news site leads with "Sunak halved schools repairs budget in 2021". Might that push Sunak down to Truss levels of unpopularity? It's the perfect exemplar of what's wrong with the Conservative Party's ideology.
Legal pedal assistant bikes are not a problem and should be encouraged and subsidised as they are a great way of getting people into cycling. Electric bikes that don't need pedalling need to be banned, as do those fucking scooters that zip around town centres. Any adult caught riding one should be arrested, fined a grand and the bike crushed in front of them. The police should be free to knock people off them, then reverse over them just to be sure and the bodies left on the road as a warning. Kids riding them should be taken into care. Harsh, but it's the only way.
You're yet another one of those namby-pamby, woke liberals about which one hears too much.
Why don't you realise that this menace won't be crushed unless we burn down their homes, shoot their families, and dance on their graves singing comic songs?
Still a slacker
Everyone was terrified of Doug. I've seen grown men pull their own heads off rather than see Doug. Even Dinsdale was frightened of Doug.
2nd Interviewer: What did he do?
Vercotti: He used... sarcasm. He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor, pathos, puns, parody, litotes and... satire. He was vicious.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
There is some logic in that but as the clock ticks down to GE 24, I expect him to come under increasing scrutiny from the media when sitting on the fence will not wash
Quite frankly, something will have to give with Labour. I’m not sure exactly what or where, but there will become a point on current trajectory where the question will be asked where the money or savings are going to come from to help lift us out of this mess.
Growth is a nice idea (and indeed the right idea). But as Truss discovered it needs to be centred around a medium to long term plan. You can’t expect the markets to like big bang economics in our current state. Yes planning reform will help and they have hit on something there that does need to be changed. But it isn’t going to generate enough growth by itself to pay for schools, the NHS, infrastructure investment…
Perhaps they are hoping to fill the gap by borrowing to invest. But they seem to be cautiously rowing back on this too.
At some point they will cross a rubicon. What they have to avoid is the creation of a narrative of: “Sunak is useless but why change governments if you’re going to do exactly the same as him?”
There's another interesting (to me, at least...) point here. All the cyclists screeching: "The speed limits don't apply to cycles!" are ignoring the morality of it. It may be *legal* to ride your bike at 40MP in a 30MPH zone; but is it the *right* thing to do?
I'd strongly argue no. It's very antisocial.
I would say it's moderately antisocial (so I wouldn't do it, not that I can get anywhere near 40mph except on a very long clear downhill, at which point I'm usually braking for my own safety and peace of mind), but it is much less antisocial than a car doing 40 there. We set speed limits for a combination of safety and noise reasons and we set the specific numbers with motor vehicles in mind. A 40mph car makes a lot more noise and has a lot more momentum than a 40mph bicycle.
In an alternate world without motor vehicles, would we have ever imposed speed limits (rather than using some other behaviour-based definitions for laws against dangerous road use)? My guess is not, because very few cyclists are even capable of exceeding most limits.
Any physicists here? I wonder how fast a cyclist would have to go before they carry as much energy as a car at 30mph. Presume it's not just E=1/2mv^2
So... you're saying that maximum permissible speeds should be relative to the vehicle's weight? So a moped weighing 1/5 of a car could go much faster than the speed limit? On someone on a push scooter could go near the speed of light? (exaggerating, obvs)
It's a ridiculous argument. For one thing, it's not just about crashes; it's about reaction times and braking distances as well, for both the cyclist and motorists.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
No, this government is exhausted and so incompetent it doesn't even realise what many of its successes are.
But Starmer is going to face the impossibility of meeting a myriad of spending demands through 'economic growth'.
Incidentally economic growth includes the public sector increasing output faster than increasing workforce or pay.
A good thing if it happens but I suspect its the opposite of what the public sector unions want from a Labour government.
The UK Government spends more on welfare than it does on the entire public sector combined.
The Tories have sadly replaced Labour as the party of the welfare state. The Tories are spending a higher proportion of state expenditure on welfare today than Labour did in 2010.
Public sector employee output is higher than welfare recipient output is, so a rebalancing certainly could boost productivity.
And we have this welfare spending at a time of full employment.
Too many people are getting too many handouts.
And the danger is that a critical mass of welfare recipients has been achieved which makes it impossible to reform this.
"in order to boost the economy we are going to have to cut social security spending. We know that practically every penny in "benefits" is rapidly spent in the local economy, so these cuts will inevitably lead to more shops closing and more people losing their jobs which in turn slows the economy. But tax cuts for the rich pensioners and hedge fund bosses who own us don't come cheap, so..."
Government spending certainly influences GDP growth. In last weeks ONS revision the big corrections were in "wholesale and retail trade: repair of motor vehicles and motorcycles" and "human health and social work activities". The other revisions being fairly trivial, and also trivial in non-covid years.
So it seems the NHS bounceback and increase in productivity was greater than thought. I haven't noticed the PB Tories trumpeting this contribution to growth of GDP.
Legal pedal assistant bikes are not a problem and should be encouraged and subsidised as they are a great way of getting people into cycling. Electric bikes that don't need pedalling need to be banned, as do those fucking scooters that zip around town centres. Any adult caught riding one should be arrested, fined a grand and the bike crushed in front of them. The police should be free to knock people off them, then reverse over them just to be sure and the bodies left on the road as a warning. Kids riding them should be taken into care. Harsh, but it's the only way.
There was one in the CCF armoury at school. But they wouldn’t let us take it out. Sob.
That would work against electric bikes.
I can't recall who said that they would be ideal for hunting the larger kinds of railway locomotive.
In real life, the Soviet versions were used by Russian partisans to hunt steam locomotives for real. One shot through the boiler could yield impressive result.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
There is some logic in that but as the clock ticks down to GE 24, I expect him to come under increasing scrutiny from the media when sitting on the fence will not wash
Quite frankly, something will have to give with Labour. I’m not sure exactly what or where, but there will become a point on current trajectory where the question will be asked where the money or savings are going to come from to help lift us out of this mess.
Growth is a nice idea (and indeed the right idea). But as Truss discovered it needs to be centred around a medium to long term plan. You can’t expect the markets to like big bang economics in our current state. Yes planning reform will help and they have hit on something there that does need to be changed. But it isn’t going to generate enough growth by itself to pay for schools, the NHS, infrastructure investment…
Perhaps they are hoping to fill the gap by borrowing to invest. But they seem to be cautiously rowing back on this too.
At some point they will cross a rubicon. What they have to avoid is the creation of a narrative of: “Sunak is useless but why change governments if you’re going to do exactly the same as him?”
A Tory rebellion to end a ban in place since 2015. Would that have been Gordon Brown or Ed Miliband? Boris is one of the rebels. It is a tragedy he never reached Downing Street so could do nothing about it himself.
The BBC news site leads with "Sunak halved schools repairs budget in 2021". Might that push Sunak down to Truss levels of unpopularity? It's the perfect exemplar of what's wrong with the Conservative Party's ideology.
Epic fail by Sunak.
Genuinely has to be one of the worst recent headlines for a PM. Hilariously ironic.
Checkmate. Maybe on one of those chess boards Rishi is allowing councils to bid for.
Of all the difficult situations the Tories have found themselves in since the last GE, the maintainance of schools is likely to have a lasting impact on voters. It strongly reinforces the stereotype that the Tories cut spending while letting the long term infrastructure of in the UK crumble. On top of that a decision to massively cut school maintainance spending 3 years ago by the Chancellor, now looks terrible, even though the last 3 years is a minor compared to the decisions made over the last 13 years. The problem for the Prime Minister is that he can't even push the blame onto the Chancellor who made that decision!
I think in the last few days the chances have plummeted, that the Tories can regain many of the opinion poll don't knows and reduce the deficit in VI-Polls to under 5%.
Legal pedal assistant bikes are not a problem and should be encouraged and subsidised as they are a great way of getting people into cycling. Electric bikes that don't need pedalling need to be banned, as do those fucking scooters that zip around town centres. Any adult caught riding one should be arrested, fined a grand and the bike crushed in front of them. The police should be free to knock people off them, then reverse over them just to be sure and the bodies left on the road as a warning. Kids riding them should be taken into care. Harsh, but it's the only way.
You're yet another one of those namby-pamby, woke liberals about which one hears too much.
Why don't you realise that this menace won't be crushed unless we burn down their homes, shoot their families, and dance on their graves singing comic songs?
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
There is some logic in that but as the clock ticks down to GE 24, I expect him to come under increasing scrutiny from the media when sitting on the fence will not wash
Quite frankly, something will have to give with Labour. I’m not sure exactly what or where, but there will become a point on current trajectory where the question will be asked where the money or savings are going to come from to help lift us out of this mess.
Growth is a nice idea (and indeed the right idea). But as Truss discovered it needs to be centred around a medium to long term plan. You can’t expect the markets to like big bang economics in our current state. Yes planning reform will help and they have hit on something there that does need to be changed. But it isn’t going to generate enough growth by itself to pay for schools, the NHS, infrastructure investment…
Perhaps they are hoping to fill the gap by borrowing to invest. But they seem to be cautiously rowing back on this too.
At some point they will cross a rubicon. What they have to avoid is the creation of a narrative of: “Sunak is useless but why change governments if you’re going to do exactly the same as him?”
Part of the problem, is that incompetent attempts at reducing costs in government have given the idea a bad name.
So we have poor productivity and people declaring that nothing can be done.
If we can do things more cheaply, we can do more. And before anyone says it, cheap != poor quality. It is perfectly possible to spend billions on rubbish. And it has been done often.
We could reduce the human touch element on vast swathes of government paper pushing. In many cases, 95% can go via the automated process, leaving the humans to help the 5% of more complex problems.
It is a tragedy that he felt unwelcome and unwanted in the modern Tory Party. He is an absolute giant compared to anyone in politics today and I would vote for him in a heartbeat.
Ex DfE perm sec Slater sticking the knife into Rishi this morning.
DfE knew 300-400 schools needed RAAC work, treasury only agreed to fund 100 but then-chancellor Sunak revised down to 50.
Something of the last 13 years in microcosm in this RAAC palaver.
This is all hugely dangerous for the Conservatives. It tends to crystalise the long-held sense that things are falling apart at the seams in a tangible way that feels like it is going on in your community (even if, in fact, your local school isn't affected). It could be a really emblematic issue in the run up to the General Election.
There's an element of bad luck in it because the issues with RAAC moved very quickly from some time being available to no time being available. But there's no real fig leaf here - the Conservatives cannot reasonably say they have a good record on capital investment in schools, and now Sunak's fingerprints are personally on the failures.
Not sure it will shift large numbers of votes but, in line with OGH's article, it will harden the anti-Tory vote making it ever harder to get it back into competitive territory.
It won't affect middle-class pensioners so the core vote shouldn't drop much, if at all.
A Tory rebellion to end a ban in place since 2015. Would that have been Gordon Brown or Ed Miliband? Boris is one of the rebels. It is a tragedy he never reached Downing Street so could do nothing about it himself.
Ex DfE perm sec Slater sticking the knife into Rishi this morning.
DfE knew 300-400 schools needed RAAC work, treasury only agreed to fund 100 but then-chancellor Sunak revised down to 50.
Something of the last 13 years in microcosm in this RAAC palaver.
This is all hugely dangerous for the Conservatives. It tends to crystalise the long-held sense that things are falling apart at the seams in a tangible way that feels like it is going on in your community (even if, in fact, your local school isn't affected). It could be a really emblematic issue in the run up to the General Election.
There's an element of bad luck in it because the issues with RAAC moved very quickly from some time being available to no time being available. But there's no real fig leaf here - the Conservatives cannot reasonably say they have a good record on capital investment in schools, and now Sunak's fingerprints are personally on the failures.
Not sure it will shift large numbers of votes but, in line with OGH's article, it will harden the anti-Tory vote making it ever harder to get it back into competitive territory.
It won't affect middle-class pensioners so the core vote shouldn't drop much, if at all.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
There is some logic in that but as the clock ticks down to GE 24, I expect him to come under increasing scrutiny from the media when sitting on the fence will not wash
Quite frankly, something will have to give with Labour. I’m not sure exactly what or where, but there will become a point on current trajectory where the question will be asked where the money or savings are going to come from to help lift us out of this mess.
Growth is a nice idea (and indeed the right idea). But as Truss discovered it needs to be centred around a medium to long term plan. You can’t expect the markets to like big bang economics in our current state. Yes planning reform will help and they have hit on something there that does need to be changed. But it isn’t going to generate enough growth by itself to pay for schools, the NHS, infrastructure investment…
Perhaps they are hoping to fill the gap by borrowing to invest. But they seem to be cautiously rowing back on this too.
At some point they will cross a rubicon. What they have to avoid is the creation of a narrative of: “Sunak is useless but why change governments if you’re going to do exactly the same as him?”
The problem is that Labour know they can't offer to solve all problems at the moment and as soon as they start talking about spending money on X people will be saying spend it on Y / Z instead.
Also I think the finances are going to be so dire when Labour get into power that I really don't think there will be any money to spend on anything - the first few years of this Labour Government are going to require some tough and painful decisions to be made...
The Netherlands is the world's second largest agricultural exporter - how is that possible ? Does that involve re-export of imports, or are they just immensely good at it ?
There's another interesting (to me, at least...) point here. All the cyclists screeching: "The speed limits don't apply to cycles!" are ignoring the morality of it. It may be *legal* to ride your bike at 40MP in a 30MPH zone; but is it the *right* thing to do?
I'd strongly argue no. It's very antisocial.
I would say it's moderately antisocial (so I wouldn't do it, not that I can get anywhere near 40mph except on a very long clear downhill, at which point I'm usually braking for my own safety and peace of mind), but it is much less antisocial than a car doing 40 there. We set speed limits for a combination of safety and noise reasons and we set the specific numbers with motor vehicles in mind. A 40mph car makes a lot more noise and has a lot more momentum than a 40mph bicycle.
In an alternate world without motor vehicles, would we have ever imposed speed limits (rather than using some other behaviour-based definitions for laws against dangerous road use)? My guess is not, because very few cyclists are even capable of exceeding most limits.
Any physicists here? I wonder how fast a cyclist would have to go before they carry as much energy as a car at 30mph. Presume it's not just E=1/2mv^2
So... you're saying that maximum permissible speeds should be relative to the vehicle's weight? So a moped weighing 1/5 of a car could go much faster than the speed limit? On someone on a push scooter could go near the speed of light? (exaggerating, obvs)
It's a ridiculous argument. For one thing, it's not just about crashes; it's about reaction times and braking distances as well, for both the cyclist and motorists.
If it's about reaction times, perhaps we should have slower speed limits for older people.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
Manifestos are pretty useful after an election in terms of getting things done, though. It's an absolute trump card with the House of Lords. It's very handy with the civil service because there is clarity that things are the will (and priority) of the administration rather than a here today, gone tomorrow minister. And "we're simply doing what we said we'd do, and what people voted for" is a strong line even if it's based on a bit of a fiction about how people decide their votes. If you have a very thin manifesto, you can lose momentum quite badly.
Theresa May's difficulty over Dementia Tax has turned into a reason not to have policies. In fact, it was more symptomatic of May's wider problem that she was deep in her silo and people would be blindsided by stuff they'd not seen or kicked the tyres on. There was no groundwork, so this kind of stuff would emerge from the balding bonce of Nick Timothy (a man who defines "less clever than he thinks he is") as THE policy, and people would immediately pick it apart because it was both a bit half-arsed and lacked a base of support.
Nick Timothy is a perfect example of failing upwards.
As far as I can see, he's never achieved anything notable or positive and in every role he's been in he's been a disaster, yet somehow seemed to keep progressing upwards.
A Tory rebellion to end a ban in place since 2015. Would that have been Gordon Brown or Ed Miliband? Boris is one of the rebels. It is a tragedy he never reached Downing Street so could do nothing about it himself.
Nick Timothy is a perfect example of failing upwards.
As far as I can see, he's never achieved anything notable or positive and in every role he's been in he's been a disaster, yet somehow seemed to keep progressing upwards.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
There is some logic in that but as the clock ticks down to GE 24, I expect him to come under increasing scrutiny from the media when sitting on the fence will not wash
Quite frankly, something will have to give with Labour. I’m not sure exactly what or where, but there will become a point on current trajectory where the question will be asked where the money or savings are going to come from to help lift us out of this mess.
Growth is a nice idea (and indeed the right idea). But as Truss discovered it needs to be centred around a medium to long term plan. You can’t expect the markets to like big bang economics in our current state. Yes planning reform will help and they have hit on something there that does need to be changed. But it isn’t going to generate enough growth by itself to pay for schools, the NHS, infrastructure investment…
Perhaps they are hoping to fill the gap by borrowing to invest. But they seem to be cautiously rowing back on this too.
At some point they will cross a rubicon. What they have to avoid is the creation of a narrative of: “Sunak is useless but why change governments if you’re going to do exactly the same as him?”
Fiscal drag. The Tories failure to address inflation will mean higher tax revenues for the incoming government so long as they don't anything stupid like cutting taxes.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
There is some logic in that but as the clock ticks down to GE 24, I expect him to come under increasing scrutiny from the media when sitting on the fence will not wash
Quite frankly, something will have to give with Labour. I’m not sure exactly what or where, but there will become a point on current trajectory where the question will be asked where the money or savings are going to come from to help lift us out of this mess.
Growth is a nice idea (and indeed the right idea). But as Truss discovered it needs to be centred around a medium to long term plan. You can’t expect the markets to like big bang economics in our current state. Yes planning reform will help and they have hit on something there that does need to be changed. But it isn’t going to generate enough growth by itself to pay for schools, the NHS, infrastructure investment…
Perhaps they are hoping to fill the gap by borrowing to invest. But they seem to be cautiously rowing back on this too.
At some point they will cross a rubicon. What they have to avoid is the creation of a narrative of: “Sunak is useless but why change governments if you’re going to do exactly the same as him?”
The problem is that Labour know they can't offer to solve all problems at the moment and as soon as they start talking about spending money on X people will be saying spend it on Y / Z instead.
Also I think the finances are going to be so dire when Labour get into power that I really don't think there will be any money to spend on anything - the first few years of this Labour Government are going to require some tough and painful decisions to be made...
Pretty much. Question is how far "now we've seen the books and the Tories left an even worse mess than we thought" can be made to stretch.
But within that, 1. There has to be a move from operational to capital spending, 2. The current Brexit model is a luxury we can't afford.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
In particular the Ashcroft data contains few surprises of the sort which would assist honest electioneering. It reflects a society that supports unlimited government expenditure, greatly increased state management and ownership of infrastructure, while opposing tax increases.
Nick Timothy is a perfect example of failing upwards.
As far as I can see, he's never achieved anything notable or positive and in every role he's been in he's been a disaster, yet somehow seemed to keep progressing upwards.
Jeremy Corbyn: When both front benches are in agreement, the working classes are losing out.
Thanks for that insight Jezza, except in all the cases where it's obviously nonsense. Like say Ukraine, abortion, pensions, infrastructure investment...
Starmer doesn't have to say, or do, anything much while the Tories are in self-destruct mode. It's not the time to pre-announce the detail of what will be in Labour's GE manifesto.
Those who think, however, that Labour has no plan and no policies should relax. Starmer would be an absolute idiot to go into the next GE without a coherent plan to turn things around, combined with some well-tested retail policies to seduce wavering voters. And, whatever your opinion of Starmer, he isn't an absolute idiot.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
There is some logic in that but as the clock ticks down to GE 24, I expect him to come under increasing scrutiny from the media when sitting on the fence will not wash
Quite frankly, something will have to give with Labour. I’m not sure exactly what or where, but there will become a point on current trajectory where the question will be asked where the money or savings are going to come from to help lift us out of this mess.
Growth is a nice idea (and indeed the right idea). But as Truss discovered it needs to be centred around a medium to long term plan. You can’t expect the markets to like big bang economics in our current state. Yes planning reform will help and they have hit on something there that does need to be changed. But it isn’t going to generate enough growth by itself to pay for schools, the NHS, infrastructure investment…
Perhaps they are hoping to fill the gap by borrowing to invest. But they seem to be cautiously rowing back on this too.
At some point they will cross a rubicon. What they have to avoid is the creation of a narrative of: “Sunak is useless but why change governments if you’re going to do exactly the same as him?”
Fiscal drag. The Tories failure to address inflation will mean higher tax revenues for the incoming government so long as they don't anything stupid like cutting taxes.
Whats wrong with people keeping more of their own money ?
Starmer doesn't have to say, or do, anything much while the Tories are in self-destruct mode. It's not the time to pre-announce the detail of what will be in Labour's GE manifesto.
Those who think, however, that Labour has no plan and no policies should relax. Starmer would be an absolute idiot to go into the next GE without a coherent plan to turn things around, combined with some well-tested retail policies to seduce wavering voters. And, whatever your opinion of Starmer, he isn't an absolute idiot.
Nick Timothy is a perfect example of failing upwards.
As far as I can see, he's never achieved anything notable or positive and in every role he's been in he's been a disaster, yet somehow seemed to keep progressing upwards.
Nick Timothy is a perfect example of failing upwards.
As far as I can see, he's never achieved anything notable or positive and in every role he's been in he's been a disaster, yet somehow seemed to keep progressing upwards.
Jeremy Corbyn: When both front benches are in agreement, the working classes are losing out.
Thanks for that insight Jezza, except in all the cases where it's obviously nonsense. Like say Ukraine, abortion, pensions, infrastructure investment...
How did I ever support this man, I need help.
So the NHS is a bad idea. As are State Pensions. Building railways. Good to know.
Starmer doesn't have to say, or do, anything much while the Tories are in self-destruct mode. It's not the time to pre-announce the detail of what will be in Labour's GE manifesto.
Those who think, however, that Labour has no plan and no policies should relax. Starmer would be an absolute idiot to go into the next GE without a coherent plan to turn things around, combined with some well-tested retail policies to seduce wavering voters. And, whatever your opinion of Starmer, he isn't an absolute idiot.
Ban this, subsidise that. Subsidise this, ban that. PB has weird instincts. If that Times article about things we are not talking about is right, and those figures posted by Casino are right, we are about to turn into a NHS with a small country attached. We need to be talking about expanding the tax base and contracting the Government. Tax more, spend less. Do less with less. In short, fiscal policy.
Starmer doesn't have to say, or do, anything much while the Tories are in self-destruct mode. It's not the time to pre-announce the detail of what will be in Labour's GE manifesto.
Those who think, however, that Labour has no plan and no policies should relax. Starmer would be an absolute idiot to go into the next GE without a coherent plan to turn things around, combined with some well-tested retail policies to seduce wavering voters. And, whatever your opinion of Starmer, he isn't an absolute idiot.
Starmer doesn't have to say, or do, anything much while the Tories are in self-destruct mode. It's not the time to pre-announce the detail of what will be in Labour's GE manifesto.
Those who think, however, that Labour has no plan and no policies should relax. Starmer would be an absolute idiot to go into the next GE without a coherent plan to turn things around, combined with some well-tested retail policies to seduce wavering voters. And, whatever your opinion of Starmer, he isn't an absolute idiot.
Hes an empty suit
He will end up disappointing
I wonder if I'd get away with such analysis of Rishi.
There's another interesting (to me, at least...) point here. All the cyclists screeching: "The speed limits don't apply to cycles!" are ignoring the morality of it. It may be *legal* to ride your bike at 40MP in a 30MPH zone; but is it the *right* thing to do?
I'd strongly argue no. It's very antisocial.
I would say it's moderately antisocial (so I wouldn't do it, not that I can get anywhere near 40mph except on a very long clear downhill, at which point I'm usually braking for my own safety and peace of mind), but it is much less antisocial than a car doing 40 there. We set speed limits for a combination of safety and noise reasons and we set the specific numbers with motor vehicles in mind. A 40mph car makes a lot more noise and has a lot more momentum than a 40mph bicycle.
In an alternate world without motor vehicles, would we have ever imposed speed limits (rather than using some other behaviour-based definitions for laws against dangerous road use)? My guess is not, because very few cyclists are even capable of exceeding most limits.
Any physicists here? I wonder how fast a cyclist would have to go before they carry as much energy as a car at 30mph. Presume it's not just E=1/2mv^2
Yes, but others have answered that.
However, it's not just the kinetic energy of the impacting object that matters in a collision, but the area of contact that determines the forces and damage. I'd rather be hit by a car (large, deformable bonnet) at 20mph than a bike (small rigid metal tubes, pointy handle-bars).
Starmer doesn't have to say, or do, anything much while the Tories are in self-destruct mode. It's not the time to pre-announce the detail of what will be in Labour's GE manifesto.
Those who think, however, that Labour has no plan and no policies should relax. Starmer would be an absolute idiot to go into the next GE without a coherent plan to turn things around, combined with some well-tested retail policies to seduce wavering voters. And, whatever your opinion of Starmer, he isn't an absolute idiot.
Hes an empty suit
He will end up disappointing
I wonder if I'd get away with such analysis of Rishi.
Sounds like Chris Pincher has lost his appeal against Commons suspension, triggering a recall petition in Tamworth.
Wonder if there may be pressure on him to resign quickly to tie in with other by-elections and get them done?
I know that Pincher's persistence in clinging on has been a particular irritant to Neil "Oooo, Tractors" Parish, who at least fell on his sword (no sniggering at the back) promptly... having had his arm twisted by the Deputy Chief Whip at the time, Mr Christopher Pincher.
I take it your sticking with another 13 years of inch- perfect Conservative Governments then.
This is the absurdity of the Tory position. They have broken the economy and public services - and everyone can see and feel it. Worse is that Tories deny this is the case and therefore have no plan to do anything different. And yet the comeback is always "what will Starmer do about it - he has no plan"
I would just comment that as we enter the final year of this Parliament with everyone and their dogs expecting Starmer to enter no 10 next Autumn, it is entirely reasonable to examine Starmer's responses and actions he may take in respect of a wide range of important issues, not just the NHS but now the crisis in our Schools which by the way seems to prevail in Scotland and Wales which is devolved to them
It does seem surprising that only yesterday Starmer emphasised he will not increase any taxes and he has already ruled out wealth taxes. The question follows then how will he change anything on taking office, as improving GDP can only be a long term aspiration
I mentioned Lord Ashcroft's poll published today about 'the state of the nation' and frankly none of our politicians are touching the surface on the extensive changes need to our society, not least the end to the triple lock
Some on here (@BartholomewRoberts) have quite radical views on equalising tax and NI rates and applying them across all income, earned and unearned, but when have we ever heard a mainstem politician raise it
Yes, the conservatives are tired and out of ideas, and the opportunity now afforded to Starmer to be brave and take the real opportunity to change things seems to be overruled by his inability to say or do anything that may be unpopular or scare the horses
There is a real danger the opportunity is going to be missed
You don't win elections by laying out radical plans to address deep seated problems. Look what happened to Theresa May and her rather fabulous Dementia Tax.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
There is some logic in that but as the clock ticks down to GE 24, I expect him to come under increasing scrutiny from the media when sitting on the fence will not wash
Quite frankly, something will have to give with Labour. I’m not sure exactly what or where, but there will become a point on current trajectory where the question will be asked where the money or savings are going to come from to help lift us out of this mess.
Growth is a nice idea (and indeed the right idea). But as Truss discovered it needs to be centred around a medium to long term plan. You can’t expect the markets to like big bang economics in our current state. Yes planning reform will help and they have hit on something there that does need to be changed. But it isn’t going to generate enough growth by itself to pay for schools, the NHS, infrastructure investment…
Perhaps they are hoping to fill the gap by borrowing to invest. But they seem to be cautiously rowing back on this too.
At some point they will cross a rubicon. What they have to avoid is the creation of a narrative of: “Sunak is useless but why change governments if you’re going to do exactly the same as him?”
Good post, good points, but personally I'd settle for a Government that was less corrupt and less incompetent than we have, and which respected the Institutions of State, such as Parliament. If it also improved the administration of transport, schools and the health service, that would be a bonus
That is setting the bar low but it will do for me. I wouldn't even mind a bit of Socialism but they can start with the low-hanging fruit and maybe move on from there.
If they do that, they could be kicking the Tories into the long grass for a very long time. I don't think Joe Public is going to forgive them easily for some of the things they've done, unless Starmer and pals turn out to be very bad indeed.
Starmer doesn't have to say, or do, anything much while the Tories are in self-destruct mode. It's not the time to pre-announce the detail of what will be in Labour's GE manifesto.
Those who think, however, that Labour has no plan and no policies should relax. Starmer would be an absolute idiot to go into the next GE without a coherent plan to turn things around, combined with some well-tested retail policies to seduce wavering voters. And, whatever your opinion of Starmer, he isn't an absolute idiot.
Hes an empty suit
He will end up disappointing
Whilst I agree that he inevitably will end up disappointing, the "empty suit" jibe backfires a little.
The issue with Sunak and the current ministerial team is that they are a blockage. The civil service is highlighting oncoming catastrophes - such as hundreds of schools that need emergency repair and rapid replacement. Sunak and Zahawi et al are saying no. An empty suit would not be such an impediment and we wouldn't now be in this mess.
I have to be honest, I think a lot less of Labour with these attack ads on Sunak. They don't sit right with me in the way they are presented.
Horribly negative campaigning like this is Pandora’s Box.
It may seem fun for the party’s social media team, but once it’s been started in that manner, it’s difficult to row back from and invites responses from opponents both official and unofficial.
“Do you think paedophile children’s TV presenters should be prosecuted?” Sir Keir Starmer doesn’t. will be a line in tens of millions of Facebook ads in Red Wall constituencies, in the run up to the election.
They won’t be from the Conservatives officially, as most online ads aren’t actually from political parties, but from opponents of Starmer doing their own thing.
Starmer doesn't have to say, or do, anything much while the Tories are in self-destruct mode. It's not the time to pre-announce the detail of what will be in Labour's GE manifesto.
Those who think, however, that Labour has no plan and no policies should relax. Starmer would be an absolute idiot to go into the next GE without a coherent plan to turn things around, combined with some well-tested retail policies to seduce wavering voters. And, whatever your opinion of Starmer, he isn't an absolute idiot.
Hes an empty suit
He will end up disappointing
Whilst I agree that he inevitably will end up disappointing, the "empty suit" jibe backfires a little.
The issue with Sunak and the current ministerial team is that they are a blockage. The civil service is highlighting oncoming catastrophes - such as hundreds of schools that need emergency repair and rapid replacement.
Ah, but the people of this country have had enough of experts.
Nick Timothy is a perfect example of failing upwards.
As far as I can see, he's never achieved anything notable or positive and in every role he's been in he's been a disaster, yet somehow seemed to keep progressing upwards.
He got rid of that stupid Solzhenitsyn beard, that's something achieved. That is about it though.
Edit: managed to spell Solzhenitsyn correctly on first attempt, quite proud of myself. The day can only go downhill..
No I am not. After his talk last night I am utterly convinced the country would be in a much better state if he'd become PM in 2019.
We would be in a better state if absolutely anyone become PM except Bozo and probably Corbyn.
The issue is that the selection of the best qualified person to be PM is no longer in the hands of a competent electorate but in the hands of people of a group of unqualified biased idiots (party members).
Party Members really should only have a say when their party is in opposition and even then it's a very stupid and bad idea...
I have to be honest, I think a lot less of Labour with these attack ads on Sunak. They don't sit right with me in the way they are presented.
Horribly negative campaigning like this is Pandora’s Box.
It may seem fun for the party’s social media team, but once it’s been started in that manner, it’s difficult to row back from and invites responses from opponents both official and unofficial.
“Do you think paedophile children’s TV presenters should be prosecuted?” Sir Keir Starmer doesn’t. will be a line in tens of millions of Facebook ads in Red Wall constituencies, in the run up to the election.
They won’t be from the Conservatives officially, as most online ads aren’t actually from political parties, but from opponents of Starmer doing their own thing.
Starmer doesn't have to say, or do, anything much while the Tories are in self-destruct mode. It's not the time to pre-announce the detail of what will be in Labour's GE manifesto.
Those who think, however, that Labour has no plan and no policies should relax. Starmer would be an absolute idiot to go into the next GE without a coherent plan to turn things around, combined with some well-tested retail policies to seduce wavering voters. And, whatever your opinion of Starmer, he isn't an absolute idiot.
Hes an empty suit
He will end up disappointing
Whilst I agree that he inevitably will end up disappointing, the "empty suit" jibe backfires a little.
The issue with Sunak and the current ministerial team is that they are a blockage. The civil service is highlighting oncoming catastrophes - such as hundreds of schools that need emergency repair and rapid replacement. Sunak and Zahawi et al are saying no. An empty suit would not be such an impediment and we wouldn't now be in this mess.
We got in this mess about 30 years ago when we built the schools. All three parties have been in government and have done nothing about it. SKS wont either he has no money.
No I am not. After his talk last night I am utterly convinced the country would be in a much better state if he'd become PM in 2019.
We would be in a better state if absolutely anyone become PM except Bozo and probably Corbyn.
The issue is that the selection of the best qualified person to be PM is no longer in the hands of a competent electorate but in the hands of people of a group of unqualified biased idiots (party members).
Party Members really should only have a say when their party is in opposition and even then it's a very stupid and bad idea...
It used to be Labour rules that when in Government only MPs could choose the leader. I suggest they go back to that if Starmer wins.
If he does, I wonder how long Starmer will be PM for.
No I am not. After his talk last night I am utterly convinced the country would be in a much better state if he'd become PM in 2019.
He's an engaging fellow, and wasn't a bad junior minister. It's a shame he never got his chance to cut his teeth on a Government department.
But there are two key points. Firstly, he's unproven - that's not really his fault, but we don't know whether he'd be effective at cabinet level. Secondly, he simply couldn't have managed the Tory divisions at that time - if he'd been PM AND Tory MPs weren't an ungovernable rabble, he might have been good. As it was, only the World King could see them through the moment, notwithstanding his massive, RAAC-style structural problems that later led to him being condemned as a danger to the public and in need of immediate demolition.
There's another interesting (to me, at least...) point here. All the cyclists screeching: "The speed limits don't apply to cycles!" are ignoring the morality of it. It may be *legal* to ride your bike at 40MP in a 30MPH zone; but is it the *right* thing to do?
I'd strongly argue no. It's very antisocial.
I would say it's moderately antisocial (so I wouldn't do it, not that I can get anywhere near 40mph except on a very long clear downhill, at which point I'm usually braking for my own safety and peace of mind), but it is much less antisocial than a car doing 40 there. We set speed limits for a combination of safety and noise reasons and we set the specific numbers with motor vehicles in mind. A 40mph car makes a lot more noise and has a lot more momentum than a 40mph bicycle.
In an alternate world without motor vehicles, would we have ever imposed speed limits (rather than using some other behaviour-based definitions for laws against dangerous road use)? My guess is not, because very few cyclists are even capable of exceeding most limits.
Any physicists here? I wonder how fast a cyclist would have to go before they carry as much energy as a car at 30mph. Presume it's not just E=1/2mv^2
Yes, but others have answered that.
However, it's not just the kinetic energy of the impacting object that matters in a collision, but the area of contact that determines the forces and damage. I'd rather be hit by a car (large, deformable bonnet) at 20mph than a bike (small rigid metal tubes, pointy handle-bars).
I'll take the bike, looking at car/bike pedestrian death rates.
There's another interesting (to me, at least...) point here. All the cyclists screeching: "The speed limits don't apply to cycles!" are ignoring the morality of it. It may be *legal* to ride your bike at 40MP in a 30MPH zone; but is it the *right* thing to do?
I'd strongly argue no. It's very antisocial.
I would say it's moderately antisocial (so I wouldn't do it, not that I can get anywhere near 40mph except on a very long clear downhill, at which point I'm usually braking for my own safety and peace of mind), but it is much less antisocial than a car doing 40 there. We set speed limits for a combination of safety and noise reasons and we set the specific numbers with motor vehicles in mind. A 40mph car makes a lot more noise and has a lot more momentum than a 40mph bicycle.
In an alternate world without motor vehicles, would we have ever imposed speed limits (rather than using some other behaviour-based definitions for laws against dangerous road use)? My guess is not, because very few cyclists are even capable of exceeding most limits.
Any physicists here? I wonder how fast a cyclist would have to go before they carry as much energy as a car at 30mph. Presume it's not just E=1/2mv^2
Yes, but others have answered that.
However, it's not just the kinetic energy of the impacting object that matters in a collision, but the area of contact that determines the forces and damage. I'd rather be hit by a car (large, deformable bonnet) at 20mph than a bike (small rigid metal tubes, pointy handle-bars).
Gosh. How's that Physics For Dummies course going?
Sounds like Chris Pincher has lost his appeal against Commons suspension, triggering a recall petition in Tamworth.
Wonder if there may be pressure on him to resign quickly to tie in with other by-elections and get them done?
I know that Pincher's persistence in clinging on has been a particular irritant to Neil "Oooo, Tractors" Parish, who at least fell on his sword (no sniggering at the back) promptly... having had his arm twisted by the Deputy Chief Whip at the time, Mr Christopher Pincher.
Tamworth would be a certainty for Labour to be the challenger; LDs got 5% of the vote last time. 21% swing needed by Labour - bigger than needed at Selby.
Tamworth was politically important in 1834. Has anything much happened since?
Ex DfE perm sec Slater sticking the knife into Rishi this morning.
DfE knew 300-400 schools needed RAAC work, treasury only agreed to fund 100 but then-chancellor Sunak revised down to 50.
Something of the last 13 years in microcosm in this RAAC palaver.
This is all hugely dangerous for the Conservatives. It tends to crystalise the long-held sense that things are falling apart at the seams in a tangible way that feels like it is going on in your community (even if, in fact, your local school isn't affected). It could be a really emblematic issue in the run up to the General Election.
There's an element of bad luck in it because the issues with RAAC moved very quickly from some time being available to no time being available. But there's no real fig leaf here - the Conservatives cannot reasonably say they have a good record on capital investment in schools, and now Sunak's fingerprints are personally on the failures.
Not sure it will shift large numbers of votes but, in line with OGH's article, it will harden the anti-Tory vote making it ever harder to get it back into competitive territory.
It won't affect middle-class pensioners so the core vote shouldn't drop much, if at all.
Grandchildren
Nah, their concern for other doesn't reach that far.
Sounds like Chris Pincher has lost his appeal against Commons suspension, triggering a recall petition in Tamworth.
Wonder if there may be pressure on him to resign quickly to tie in with other by-elections and get them done?
I know that Pincher's persistence in clinging on has been a particular irritant to Neil "Oooo, Tractors" Parish, who at least fell on his sword (no sniggering at the back) promptly... having had his arm twisted by the Deputy Chief Whip at the time, Mr Christopher Pincher.
Tamworth would be a certainty for Labour to be the challenger; LDs got 5% of the vote last time. 21% swing needed by Labour - bigger than needed at Selby.
Tamworth was politically important in 1834. Has anything much happened since?
Tamworth's electoral history is odd - solidly Labour until 2010, collapse of the Labour vote in 2010, getting worse in 2015 thanks to UKIP, then recovery in 2017 but Tories accelerating away in 2017/19 thanks to UKIP disappearing. If Leavers have swung to Labour it will show up here.
Anecdote - I was short-listed for the Tamworth selection for 1997. Branch nominations were held in private houses, one of which was so neurotic about us hearing each other's speeches that they made us all stand in the street in steady rain, awaiting our turn. We half-seriously discussed collectively telling the branch to stuff its nomination and repairing to the pub.
Sounds like Chris Pincher has lost his appeal against Commons suspension, triggering a recall petition in Tamworth.
Wonder if there may be pressure on him to resign quickly to tie in with other by-elections and get them done?
I know that Pincher's persistence in clinging on has been a particular irritant to Neil "Oooo, Tractors" Parish, who at least fell on his sword (no sniggering at the back) promptly... having had his arm twisted by the Deputy Chief Whip at the time, Mr Christopher Pincher.
Tamworth would be a certainty for Labour to be the challenger; LDs got 5% of the vote last time. 21% swing needed by Labour - bigger than needed at Selby.
Tamworth was politically important in 1834. Has anything much happened since?
There was that pair of pigs that did a runner.
I think the Tamworth element in that politically important event was the breed of pig not the place, which was Malmesbury. (Malmesbury is politically important for being the birthplace of Thomas Hobbes, who understood politics better than almost anyone before or since.)
Sounds like Chris Pincher has lost his appeal against Commons suspension, triggering a recall petition in Tamworth.
Wonder if there may be pressure on him to resign quickly to tie in with other by-elections and get them done?
I know that Pincher's persistence in clinging on has been a particular irritant to Neil "Oooo, Tractors" Parish, who at least fell on his sword (no sniggering at the back) promptly... having had his arm twisted by the Deputy Chief Whip at the time, Mr Christopher Pincher.
Tamworth would be a certainty for Labour to be the challenger; LDs got 5% of the vote last time. 21% swing needed by Labour - bigger than needed at Selby.
Tamworth was politically important in 1834. Has anything much happened since?
Agree on your point about Labour. Also note that Labour have clearly put some work in anticipating a by-election. After poor local elections there in 2022, they were strong in 2023: Labour 8 (+7), Con 2 (-6), UKIP 0 (-1). Con loss to NOC. Third up, and the seat includes wards from Lichfield although Labour also enjoyed pretty good results there.
Former cabinet minister Sir Gavin Williamson has been told to apologise after a parliamentary inquiry found he had bullied a colleague in texts.
Sir Gavin quit as a minister last year after sending expletive-laden texts to former Tory chief whip Wendy Morton.
In the texts, Sir Gavin accused Ms Morton of excluding some MPs from the Queen's funeral in September last year.
He sent the texts in the run-up to the funeral and Ms Morton lodged a complaint with Parliament in November. Opposition parties have questioned why Mr Sunak appointed Sir Gavin as a minister in October last year, after being told about Ms Morton's complaint.
In a report published on Monday, an independent panel commissioned by Parliament found Sir Gavin committed a breach of the bullying and harassment policy.
It concluded that Sir Gavin's conduct was an abuse of power, finding that it had gone beyond vigorous complaint or political disagreement to a threat to lever his power and authority as a former chief whip to undermine Ms Morton personally.
The Independent Expert Panel (IEP) has required him to make an apology in the House of Commons and undergo training.
Nick Timothy is a perfect example of failing upwards.
As far as I can see, he's never achieved anything notable or positive and in every role he's been in he's been a disaster, yet somehow seemed to keep progressing upwards.
He got rid of that stupid Solzhenitsyn beard, that's something achieved. That is about it though.
Edit: managed to spell Solzhenitsyn correctly on first attempt, quite proud of myself. The day can only go downhill..
Pat McFadden to get Angela Rayner’s old brief as shadow chancellor of the duchy of lancaster at cabinet office and to be national campaign coordinator.
It's been an honour to serve as the Shadow Cabinet Minister for Mental Health. I'll continue to fight for a Labour Goverment, to change this country for the better.
No I am not. After his talk last night I am utterly convinced the country would be in a much better state if he'd become PM in 2019.
We would be in a better state if absolutely anyone become PM except Bozo and probably Corbyn.
The issue is that the selection of the best qualified person to be PM is no longer in the hands of a competent electorate but in the hands of people of a group of unqualified biased idiots (party members).
Party Members really should only have a say when their party is in opposition and even then it's a very stupid and bad idea...
I concur, but surely part of the problem lies with the silent majority who don't get involved in party politics, myself included, leaving it to the biased "idiots".
I might be wrong, but get the feeling that a lot more "normal" people (if anyone is normal) were active in party politics in the second half of the twentieth century and that gave both a better choice of candidates and better selection. Perhaps we are being too selfish and not doing our civic responsibility?
Nick Timothy is a perfect example of failing upwards.
As far as I can see, he's never achieved anything notable or positive and in every role he's been in he's been a disaster, yet somehow seemed to keep progressing upwards.
Comments
Take eg a healthy 70 year old, who could work but doesn't need to, who has a solid private pension, lives rent-free and mortgage-free, and has income from others rent via a property portfolio that doesn't attract NICs ... Do they need triple locked welfare? Is giving them welfare a good use of our taxes?
Or take a young 20 something or 30 something parent, someone who is struggling to make ends meet while paying rent. Who is facing real tax rates of 70-80%. Should they be paying more taxes to support their retired landlords welfare?
Welfare no longer goes to people in need. That's why it's so expensive, and why those in need struggle. It's the worst of both worlds.
Why don't you realise that this menace won't be crushed unless we burn down their homes, shoot their families, and dance on their graves singing comic songs?
The slow vanishing of the government as a force for action might just have found its metaphor. In the search for a political character for Rishi Sunak, local authorities have been invited to submit bids to receive £2,500 to buy a chess table and benches. It’s a chequered Cones Hotline. The clock is ticking, the prime minister is in a bind and, just as in a game of chess, he surveys the pieces and reflects that, if the Conservatives are losing badly, it might be because they have played so poorly.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/tories-are-unloved-and-it-is-easy-to-see-why-fwp5wgd07
'Is my school safe, Papa'
My instant reaction was yes it is, but then as the Welsh Government also have no idea how it effects Welsh schools then it is incumbent on them to tell Welsh parents just how safe their schools are here in Wales
I agree that due to its generosity its hard to come off UC by taking more hours at work.
Starmer might disappoint in power (we'll see) but right now he is all about winning because only by winning does he get the chance to disappoint in the first place.
One of the things that’s so aggravating about this saga is that if the DfE had acted at the beginning of the summer, all these schools could have had provision in place for the start of term. It’s the incompetence piled on top of everything else that really grates.
https://twitter.com/ProfTimBale/status/1698225803018846713
Albeit I think there's been a move away from use of school buildings in recent years.
Fact is that Truss was so unpopular not only because her government seemed wilfully reckless with the economy (something that impacts everyone, not just say parents, or patients, or commuters, or retirees) but also because she was so utterly cack handed at presentation. She had the charisma of a wet lettuce and she didn’t even have the personal story/sense of duty/projection of strength to make up for it.
Guess Ukraine would be the first country in the world with a Jewish president and a Muslim defense minister.
https://twitter.com/yarotrof/status/1698459846650085687
"We've had decades of something for nothing, unfortunately now is when we have to pay that back" may be true, but it will always lose to "it'll be fine, have another bung".
Maybe the best thing for Britain overall is for the Conservatives to spend the next year making things so bad that Starmer can pitch for a Doctor's Mandate and win on that basis.
Got a text message (it showed my bank as named so looked proper). It said there was suspicious transactions and a further text will arrive. It did. It said my card had been blocked and that I would receive a phone call from the fraud dept of the bank. Sure enough, two phone calls followed (I didn't answer). I checked my banking App and indeed there were four transactions today for Apple.Com ranging from Nil value to £10 - not mine.
I Googled the bank fraud number and called from a different phone to which the texts came in. It is a fraud and my card is being cancelled and a new one issued.
Bullet dodged - but it is very concerning that the scammer had my credit card number and my mobile number. I suppose I could change my mobile number but this would be a nuisance.
Seriously though, there is zero love lost between Crimean Tartars and Russia - and hasn't been since they last burnt Moscow.
Everyone was terrified of Doug. I've seen grown men pull their own heads off rather than see Doug. Even Dinsdale was frightened of Doug.
2nd Interviewer: What did he do?
Vercotti: He used... sarcasm. He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor, pathos, puns, parody, litotes and... satire. He was vicious.
Growth is a nice idea (and indeed the right idea). But as Truss discovered it needs to be centred around a medium to long term plan. You can’t expect the markets to like big bang economics in our current state. Yes planning reform will help and they have hit on something there that does need to be changed. But it isn’t going to generate enough growth by itself to pay for schools, the NHS, infrastructure investment…
Perhaps they are hoping to fill the gap by borrowing to invest. But they seem to be cautiously rowing back on this too.
At some point they will cross a rubicon. What they have to avoid is the creation of a narrative of: “Sunak is useless but why change governments if you’re going to do exactly the same as him?”
It's a ridiculous argument. For one thing, it's not just about crashes; it's about reaction times and braking distances as well, for both the cyclist and motorists.
So it seems the NHS bounceback and increase in productivity was greater than thought. I haven't noticed the PB Tories trumpeting this contribution to growth of GDP.
In real life, the Soviet versions were used by Russian partisans to hunt steam locomotives for real. One shot through the boiler could yield impressive result.
But did we not already have this story last December? The Telegraph did.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2022/12/06/rishi-sunak-onshore-wind-farms-tory-rebellion-boris-truss/ (£££)
I have to say this is one of the funniest videos I've ever seen. Raab actually comes out of it looking like a bit of a banter-lord.
I think in the last few days the chances have plummeted, that the Tories can regain many of the opinion poll don't knows and reduce the deficit in VI-Polls to under 5%.
So we have poor productivity and people declaring that nothing can be done.
If we can do things more cheaply, we can do more. And before anyone says it, cheap != poor quality. It is perfectly possible to spend billions on rubbish. And it has been done often.
We could reduce the human touch element on vast swathes of government paper pushing. In many cases, 95% can go via the automated process, leaving the humans to help the 5% of more complex problems.
It is a tragedy that he felt unwelcome and unwanted in the modern Tory Party. He is an absolute giant compared to anyone in politics today and I would vote for him in a heartbeat.
Another thing Richi can't get right
Also I think the finances are going to be so dire when Labour get into power that I really don't think there will be any money to spend on anything - the first few years of this Labour Government are going to require some tough and painful decisions to be made...
https://www.meidastouch.com/news/transcript-of-trump-depo-with-ny-ag-released-my-summary
Theresa May's difficulty over Dementia Tax has turned into a reason not to have policies. In fact, it was more symptomatic of May's wider problem that she was deep in her silo and people would be blindsided by stuff they'd not seen or kicked the tyres on. There was no groundwork, so this kind of stuff would emerge from the balding bonce of Nick Timothy (a man who defines "less clever than he thinks he is") as THE policy, and people would immediately pick it apart because it was both a bit half-arsed and lacked a base of support.
As far as I can see, he's never achieved anything notable or positive and in every role he's been in he's been a disaster, yet somehow seemed to keep progressing upwards.
But within that,
1. There has to be a move from operational to capital spending,
2. The current Brexit model is a luxury we can't afford.
Thanks for that insight Jezza, except in all the cases where it's obviously nonsense. Like say Ukraine, abortion, pensions, infrastructure investment...
How did I ever support this man, I need help.
Those who think, however, that Labour has no plan and no policies should relax. Starmer would be an absolute idiot to go into the next GE without a coherent plan to turn things around, combined with some well-tested retail policies to seduce wavering voters. And, whatever your opinion of Starmer, he isn't an absolute idiot.
He will end up disappointing
A: Because he's only got little legs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KJ7ztcnSwJA
Good morning, everyone.
However, it's not just the kinetic energy of the impacting object that matters in a collision, but the area of contact that determines the forces and damage. I'd rather be hit by a car (large, deformable bonnet) at 20mph than a bike (small rigid metal tubes, pointy handle-bars).
Wonder if there may be pressure on him to resign quickly to tie in with other by-elections and get them done?
I know that Pincher's persistence in clinging on has been a particular irritant to Neil "Oooo, Tractors" Parish, who at least fell on his sword (no sniggering at the back) promptly... having had his arm twisted by the Deputy Chief Whip at the time, Mr Christopher Pincher.
That is setting the bar low but it will do for me. I wouldn't even mind a bit of Socialism but they can start with the low-hanging fruit and maybe move on from there.
If they do that, they could be kicking the Tories into the long grass for a very long time. I don't think Joe Public is going to forgive them easily for some of the things they've done, unless Starmer and pals turn out to be very bad indeed.
They might be, but then again they might not.
The issue with Sunak and the current ministerial team is that they are a blockage. The civil service is highlighting oncoming catastrophes - such as hundreds of schools that need emergency repair and rapid replacement. Sunak and Zahawi et al are saying no. An empty suit would not be such an impediment and we wouldn't now be in this mess.
It may seem fun for the party’s social media team, but once it’s been started in that manner, it’s difficult to row back from and invites responses from opponents both official and unofficial.
“Do you think paedophile children’s TV presenters should be prosecuted?” Sir Keir Starmer doesn’t. will be a line in tens of millions of Facebook ads in Red Wall constituencies, in the run up to the election.
They won’t be from the Conservatives officially, as most online ads aren’t actually from political parties, but from opponents of Starmer doing their own thing.
That is about it though.
Edit: managed to spell Solzhenitsyn correctly on first attempt, quite proud of myself. The day can only go downhill..
The issue is that the selection of the best qualified person to be PM is no longer in the hands of a competent electorate but in the hands of people of a group of unqualified biased idiots (party members).
Party Members really should only have a say when their party is in opposition and even then it's a very stupid and bad idea...
Diversity in action
If he does, I wonder how long Starmer will be PM for.
But there are two key points. Firstly, he's unproven - that's not really his fault, but we don't know whether he'd be effective at cabinet level. Secondly, he simply couldn't have managed the Tory divisions at that time - if he'd been PM AND Tory MPs weren't an ungovernable rabble, he might have been good. As it was, only the World King could see them through the moment, notwithstanding his massive, RAAC-style structural problems that later led to him being condemned as a danger to the public and in need of immediate demolition.
"We can work through this relatively swiftly and we want to minimise disruption on kids' learning"
PM Rishi Sunak outlines government's response to the concrete crisis in schools
Angry Rishi
90kg of bike vs 1000-2500kg of car
Tamworth was politically important in 1834. Has anything much happened since?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamworth_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
Anecdote - I was short-listed for the Tamworth selection for 1997. Branch nominations were held in private houses, one of which was so neurotic about us hearing each other's speeches that they made us all stand in the street in steady rain, awaiting our turn. We half-seriously discussed collectively telling the branch to stuff its nomination and repairing to the pub.
Should be a Labour gain.
Former cabinet minister Sir Gavin Williamson has been told to apologise after a parliamentary inquiry found he had bullied a colleague in texts.
Sir Gavin quit as a minister last year after sending expletive-laden texts to former Tory chief whip Wendy Morton.
In the texts, Sir Gavin accused Ms Morton of excluding some MPs from the Queen's funeral in September last year.
He sent the texts in the run-up to the funeral and Ms Morton lodged a complaint with Parliament in November.
Opposition parties have questioned why Mr Sunak appointed Sir Gavin as a minister in October last year, after being told about Ms Morton's complaint.
In a report published on Monday, an independent panel commissioned by Parliament found Sir Gavin committed a breach of the bullying and harassment policy.
It concluded that Sir Gavin's conduct was an abuse of power, finding that it had gone beyond vigorous complaint or political disagreement to a threat to lever his power and authority as a former chief whip to undermine Ms Morton personally.
The Independent Expert Panel (IEP) has required him to make an apology in the House of Commons and undergo training.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66706287
Pat McFadden to get Angela Rayner’s old brief as shadow chancellor of the duchy of lancaster at cabinet office and to be national campaign coordinator.
Top Blairite now Chief Attack Dog
https://twitter.com/SamCoatesSky/status/1698649104442601925
https://twitter.com/DrRosena/status/1698648756986495170
Dr Rosena out, a shame that as I thought she was quite good
I might be wrong, but get the feeling that a lot more "normal" people (if anyone is normal) were active in party politics in the second half of the twentieth century and that gave both a better choice of candidates and better selection. Perhaps we are being too selfish and not doing our civic responsibility?
@ShabanaMahmood
has been appointed Shadow Secretary of State for Justice.
https://twitter.com/UKLabour/status/1698645845522960734
👀🌾 "The eyes of the whole world are fixed on the grain deal" - Erdogan
🤬 The Turkish President said that after the talks in Sochi, he and Putin would hold a press conference where they would "give the necessary message to the world."
https://twitter.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1698645445281468417?s=20