I see that amongst the reforms Sunak has dropped, less publicised, has been the requirement for landlords to ensure their properties are C rated for energy efficiency at least.
This is absurd.
If you want to be a landlord your property should be of a decent standard and habitable. Expecting tenants to pay through the nose for energy because landlords can't be bothered to make homes habitable is utterly insane.
Shame on Sunak.
The 'EPC rating' has nothing to do with the quality of accommodation. It is a rating system for energy efficiency. The incoming requirement to achieve a set 'level' to let out properties out has been a major contributory factor in private landlords exiting the market. This has, in combination with other things, pushed up rents by hundreds of pounds a month across the entirety of UK because of a shortage of supply. The energy savings from the measures come at great cost (ie double glazing) and hassle, and probably save a few quid a month to tenants. Instead they are replacing it with what seems like a better system, incentivising the upgrades through grants.
Having to pay hundreds extra for gas and electricity each year because of poor quality draughty homes that don't have basic insulation is absolutely to do with the quality of accommodation.
As for any slumlords who leave the market because they don't want their homes to meet a minimum quality for their tenants - good riddance!
I'm with you on this one, Bart.
Crazy policy by Rishi. LMF.
They have a successful programme that has delivered major benefits over a long period, and he cans it in search of Schrodinger's Tory Voter.
As an accidental landlord my view is it is great that there is a programme pushing the rental sector towards much more energy efficiency.
But... government needs to meet half way over costs. Because they are not mandating owner-occupiers to do all this remedial work in their own homes so it seems a little unfair to say 'only landlords must do this'.
Rishi Sunak draws up plans to slash inheritance tax
Targeting ‘the most hated tax in Britain’ is just one of the crowd-pleasing policy changes in the mix for the Tory conference
Rishi Sunak is drawing up plans to slash inheritance tax, which his officials have called “the most hated tax in Britain”.
Cutting the levy before eventually abolishing it entirely is one of a raft of crowd-pleasing announcements being considered before next month’s Conservative Party conference.
As part of his pledge to announce a series of long-term decisions designed to change Britain, Sunak would frame the policy as an “aspirational offer to voteFrs” ahead of the general election....
...Three sources confirmed that there is a live discussion at the highest level of government about reforming inheritance tax. One proposal being considered is for Sunak to announce his intention to phase out the levy by reducing the 40 per cent inheritance tax rate in the budget in March, while setting out a pathway to abolish it completely in future years.
This would tally with comments made last week by Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, that there would be no tax cuts when he presents his latest plan at the end of November.
It would also make inheritance tax an election issue and put Sir Keir Starmer on the spot about whether he was prepared to make the same cuts in years to come.
Fucking hell. It's only a day or two after they announced that there's not going to be room to reduce taxes given the current economic outlook. And now Sunak's changed his mind already. This government is swerving all over the place, doing at least two handbrake turns every day. Who can trust anything they say?
By the end of this conference season, he'll have announced that he's re-instating his meat tax, abolished it again, brought it back at double the rate, and committed to a consultation on a complex system of rebates based on the number of bins you have.
I think increasing the personal allowance is a rather greater priority than reducing inheritance tax!
But will get much fewer glowing headlines from the rightwing press which is stuffed full of editorial staff worried they may not inherit the full kaboodle from their ageing SE-based parents.
Excellent point. It was always noticeable that certain London commuter lines, such as those from Cannon Street to, was it Orpington?, used to fall under the newspaper lash far more than others, simply because the termini were close to Fleet Street.
I see that amongst the reforms Sunak has dropped, less publicised, has been the requirement for landlords to ensure their properties are C rated for energy efficiency at least.
This is absurd.
If you want to be a landlord your property should be of a decent standard and habitable. Expecting tenants to pay through the nose for energy because landlords can't be bothered to make homes habitable is utterly insane.
Shame on Sunak.
The 'EPC rating' has nothing to do with the quality of accommodation. It is a rating system for energy efficiency. The incoming requirement to achieve a set 'level' to let out properties out has been a major contributory factor in private landlords exiting the market. This has, in combination with other things, pushed up rents by hundreds of pounds a month across the entirety of UK because of a shortage of supply. The energy savings from the measures come at great cost (ie double glazing) and hassle, and probably save a few quid a month to tenants. Instead they are replacing it with what seems like a better system, incentivising the upgrades through grants.
The savings are more than a few quid. My current place has an EPC score of 87 (a high 'B'), and my gas + electric bill is about £65/month. The unrefurbished but otherwise-identical flat next door has a score of 67 (so a 'D' rating), and has a projected primary energy use that's just over 2.1x mine. The only comparable E-rated place on my street uses 4.6x more energy per sq metre. That's a lot.
The regulations as they currently stand are about setting a reasonable floor, not enforcing best practice. They're intended to ratchet up at a steady pace (one grade every 8 years, is it?) that roughly fits with normal landlord refurbishment schedules.
When the grade E floor came in, it had a cost cap of £3,500 - if the necessary improvements cost more than that, then an exemption would be granted. And there were local authority grants and government-supported finance options available to fund it. Presumably something similar would have applied to the future steps of the ratchet.
I realise that EPCs are fairly crude with a number of potential edge cases like yours. But a more accurate system would likely cost much more to run, with much more intrusive inspections needed.
If the government is now proposing to incentivise improvements purely by providing grants, how are they going to be measuring the effect of the money they'll be spending? Presumably they'll still be using EPCs? Or are they proposing to just blindly piss money up the wall in the hope that some of it will flow somewhere useful?
Really, it's almost like they haven't thought this through at all.
It is hard to express how stupid these rules are for period properties.
The recommendations for my property are 1. internal or external wall insulation. Comment. This would either destroy the appearance of the outside of the building or alternatively wreck all of its internal period features, ie the architraves and mouldings. notwithstanding the cost (£4000-£14000), for an estimated saving of £460 per year. (so about a third of the total heating bill... which I am highly sceptical of).
2. Double glazing Comment. The property has handmade timber windows that date back to when it was built. There are a total of over 70 individual windows. The EPC recommends ripping all these out and replacing it with double glazing, ie factory made plastic windows which can only be regarded as an act of architectural vandalism. The 'typical yearly saving' of this would be, wait for it.... £41.
Double glazed sash and other repro windows exist. No plastic involved.
There are insulation options for period properties - internal - that while thinner and more expensive, do actually work.
Edit: if 70 windows are only leaking £41 worth of heat, then you should have them examined by experts. Those 70 windows are a revolution in insulation, just by themselves.
We are about a third of the way through replacing our leaky single glazed sashes with double glazed versions - all wooden box sashes, sash cords, the works. Just counting up I think we now have 9 double glazed out of 21 so closer to half, including 2 of the biggest ones.
I agree wall insulation is difficult. I regret we didn’t put some internal wall lining in when we reconfigured this place (it was an old derelict United services club so we had to reinstate much of the cornicing anyway, using a company that take moulds of originals).
I am considering doing the windows at the front but this is because there is a road noise issue, we are right next to a busy road. So it is really driven by noise issues rather than thermal insulation. The windows at the rear already have secondary glazing which is what conservation officers always recommend instead of replacing windows. It is quite surprising this didn't have a more positive impact on the EPC. I'm not sure about the idea of wall insulation - but appreciate you could essentially reconstruct some of the walls to be more insulated. It would be very expensive for limited benefit. In our case the total cost of these works would at a conservative estimate be around £50k. They would never be recovered at the point of sale.
Carefully done done secondary glazing can be very unobtrusive.
In our family's listed small manor house (4 bed, 5000 sqft) we had a lot of original Georgian sash windows with some original glass.
For the windows that did not have to be replaced due to rottenness (place was empty for years when they bought it), we had a local glazier (local man who worked out of a shed) supply toughened panes of glass slightly smaller than the inside window opening, with polished edges. We then held these against the frame with a foam bead the frame side to cut draughts, and mirror hinges.
Depending on the window, we would either remove them in summer or leave them up all year round. With a remove and clean the inside-side every year or two.
Very unobtrusive, and they worked very well for the 20+ years we had them.
The way to do it is to do one, or one room, and see if it is effective. I'm sure you know that for sound insulation a wide air gap, but narrow enough to minimise convection currents, is key.
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
Rishi Sunak draws up plans to slash inheritance tax
Targeting ‘the most hated tax in Britain’ is just one of the crowd-pleasing policy changes in the mix for the Tory conference
Rishi Sunak is drawing up plans to slash inheritance tax, which his officials have called “the most hated tax in Britain”.
Cutting the levy before eventually abolishing it entirely is one of a raft of crowd-pleasing announcements being considered before next month’s Conservative Party conference.
As part of his pledge to announce a series of long-term decisions designed to change Britain, Sunak would frame the policy as an “aspirational offer to voteFrs” ahead of the general election....
...Three sources confirmed that there is a live discussion at the highest level of government about reforming inheritance tax. One proposal being considered is for Sunak to announce his intention to phase out the levy by reducing the 40 per cent inheritance tax rate in the budget in March, while setting out a pathway to abolish it completely in future years.
This would tally with comments made last week by Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, that there would be no tax cuts when he presents his latest plan at the end of November.
It would also make inheritance tax an election issue and put Sir Keir Starmer on the spot about whether he was prepared to make the same cuts in years to come.
Fucking hell. It's only a day or two after they announced that there's not going to be room to reduce taxes given the current economic outlook. And now Sunak's changed his mind already. This government is swerving all over the place, doing at least two handbrake turns every day. Who can trust anything they say?
By the end of this conference season, he'll have announced that he's re-instating his meat tax, abolished it again, brought it back at double the rate, and committed to a consultation on a complex system of rebates based on the number of bins you have.
That's the key thing.
A lot of the response to this week's announcements has been a cynical weary shrug. Only the terminally loyal think that Sunak is doing it for good reasons. The default response is that it's pointless gimmickry.
This iteration of the Conservative party broke through the Trust Thermocline a while back. Possibly with late Johnson, maybe with Truss. Point is, the break is decisive, and Rishi can't pull them back into warmer waters. Major managed it after Maggie. And Johnson after May. But it's not easy.
Cameron was able to pull off his IHT cut because he was new and not actively distrusted. Sunak is. Labour won't need to say "multi millionaire cuts tax for rich people", because many voters will be thinking it anyway.
Imagine a couple. One of them starts buying desirable, but expensive, gifts for the other.
At a certain point in the decay of the relationship, the recipient doesn't think "what a lovely (if expensive) gesture". Instead they think "what are they guilty about?"
That's the Trust Thermocline. My contention is that the Conservatives passed that a while back, and even if they do or promise good things, they won't be credited for doing them.
See also: Major's government post autumn 1992.
What's the betting Reeves has a plan up her sleeves for if Rollercoaster Rishi announces IHT scrapped/curtailed?
CGT on all inheritances, as being capital transfers. And there would be a cast iron argument for that. Moreover, as the parental home would not be the residence ofd the transferee ...
Dog owners need to be held responsible for attacks by their dogs in exactly the same way as they would be if they had personally attacked someone themselves.
They are already responsible, under the Dangerous Dogs Act Section 3. Though I am not sure if I would extend this to putting the owner down. And "be *held* responsible" is perhaps the issue.
(1)If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1 any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—
(a)the owner; and (b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
I found this bit of Section 10 (Interpretation) to be interesting:
(3)For the purposes of this Act a dog shall be regarded as dangerously out of control on any occasion on which there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person[F2 or assistance dog ], whether or not it actually does so, but references to a dog injuring a person[F3 or assistance dog ] or there being grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will do so do not include references to any case in which the dog is being used for a lawful purpose by a constable or a person in the service of the Crown.
Which is much broader than I would have expected. I can see why people use the Dangerous Dogs Act as an example of poor legislation - sweeping powers with no clear direction on who's responsible for enforcing them.
It's interesting that, for all Sunak's recent bandwagon-jumping, he has completely failed to announce any additional funding for local authority dog wardens.
I'm slightly sceptical about that given that American football wasn't shown in the UK until Channel 4 broadcast the 1983 Super Bowl for the first time. And there was no satellite TV until a year or two after that.
Perhaps he had telecine recordings sent over, but that feels rather far-fetched...
Actually, American Football was shown for the first time in the 1970s on ITV. It featured multiple times on World of Sport. My brothers were more than familiar with the likes of Terry Bradshaw and Roger Staubach.
It wasn’t until Channel 4 launched that it gained a regular berth on a UK network (which is what everybody always cites as the ‘start’ of NFL coverage here).
Ironically, it was World of Sport covering ‘marginal’ sports (including Kabaddi) that convinced ministers to insist that Channel 4 should show sports that were not shown on mainstream channels.
I see that amongst the reforms Sunak has dropped, less publicised, has been the requirement for landlords to ensure their properties are C rated for energy efficiency at least.
This is absurd.
If you want to be a landlord your property should be of a decent standard and habitable. Expecting tenants to pay through the nose for energy because landlords can't be bothered to make homes habitable is utterly insane.
Shame on Sunak.
The 'EPC rating' has nothing to do with the quality of accommodation. It is a rating system for energy efficiency. The incoming requirement to achieve a set 'level' to let out properties out has been a major contributory factor in private landlords exiting the market. This has, in combination with other things, pushed up rents by hundreds of pounds a month across the entirety of UK because of a shortage of supply. The energy savings from the measures come at great cost (ie double glazing) and hassle, and probably save a few quid a month to tenants. Instead they are replacing it with what seems like a better system, incentivising the upgrades through grants.
The savings are more than a few quid. My current place has an EPC score of 87 (a high 'B'), and my gas + electric bill is about £65/month. The unrefurbished but otherwise-identical flat next door has a score of 67 (so a 'D' rating), and has a projected primary energy use that's just over 2.1x mine. The only comparable E-rated place on my street uses 4.6x more energy per sq metre. That's a lot.
The regulations as they currently stand are about setting a reasonable floor, not enforcing best practice. They're intended to ratchet up at a steady pace (one grade every 8 years, is it?) that roughly fits with normal landlord refurbishment schedules.
When the grade E floor came in, it had a cost cap of £3,500 - if the necessary improvements cost more than that, then an exemption would be granted. And there were local authority grants and government-supported finance options available to fund it. Presumably something similar would have applied to the future steps of the ratchet.
I realise that EPCs are fairly crude with a number of potential edge cases like yours. But a more accurate system would likely cost much more to run, with much more intrusive inspections needed.
If the government is now proposing to incentivise improvements purely by providing grants, how are they going to be measuring the effect of the money they'll be spending? Presumably they'll still be using EPCs? Or are they proposing to just blindly piss money up the wall in the hope that some of it will flow somewhere useful?
Really, it's almost like they haven't thought this through at all.
It is hard to express how stupid these rules are for period properties.
The recommendations for my property are 1. internal or external wall insulation. Comment. This would either destroy the appearance of the outside of the building or alternatively wreck all of its internal period features, ie the architraves and mouldings. notwithstanding the cost (£4000-£14000), for an estimated saving of £460 per year. (so about a third of the total heating bill... which I am highly sceptical of).
2. Double glazing Comment. The property has handmade timber windows that date back to when it was built. There are a total of over 70 individual windows. The EPC recommends ripping all these out and replacing it with double glazing, ie factory made plastic windows which can only be regarded as an act of architectural vandalism. The 'typical yearly saving' of this would be, wait for it.... £41.
Double glazed sash and other repro windows exist. No plastic involved.
There are insulation options for period properties - internal - that while thinner and more expensive, do actually work.
Edit: if 70 windows are only leaking £41 worth of heat, then you should have them examined by experts. Those 70 windows are a revolution in insulation, just by themselves.
We are about a third of the way through replacing our leaky single glazed sashes with double glazed versions - all wooden box sashes, sash cords, the works. Just counting up I think we now have 9 double glazed out of 21 so closer to half, including 2 of the biggest ones.
I agree wall insulation is difficult. I regret we didn’t put some internal wall lining in when we reconfigured this place (it was an old derelict United services club so we had to reinstate much of the cornicing anyway, using a company that take moulds of originals).
I am considering doing the windows at the front but this is because there is a road noise issue, we are right next to a busy road. So it is really driven by noise issues rather than thermal insulation. The windows at the rear already have secondary glazing which is what conservation officers always recommend instead of replacing windows. It is quite surprising this didn't have a more positive impact on the EPC. I'm not sure about the idea of wall insulation - but appreciate you could essentially reconstruct some of the walls to be more insulated. It would be very expensive for limited benefit. In our case the total cost of these works would at a conservative estimate be around £50k. They would never be recovered at the point of sale.
Carefully done done secondary glazing can be very unobtrusive.
In our family's listed small manor house (4 bed, 5000 sqft) we had a lot of original Georgian sash windows with some original glass.
For the windows that did not have to be replaced due to rottenness (place was empty for years when they bought it), we had a local glazier (local man who worked out of a shed) supply toughened panes of glass slightly smaller than the inside window opening, with polished edges. We then held these against the frame with a foam bead the frame side to cut draughts, and mirror hinges.
Depending on the window, we would either remove them in summer or leave them up all year round. With a remove and clean the inside-side every year or two.
Very unobtrusive, and they worked very well for the 20+ years we had them.
The way to do it is to do one, or one room, and see if it is effective.
Dog owners need to be held responsible for attacks by their dogs in exactly the same way as they would be if they had personally attacked someone themselves.
They are already responsible, under the Dangerous Dogs Act Section 3. Though I am not sure if I would extend this to putting the owner down. And "be *held* responsible" is perhaps the issue.
(1)If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1 any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—
(a)the owner; and (b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
I was suddenly reminded of Martin Amis's Lionel Asbo.
"Lionel Asbo is a "brutally generic" yob. He looks a bit like Wayne Rooney: "the slab-like body, the full lump of the face, the tight-shaved crown with its tawny stubble"." (guardian)
"Who let the dogs in? …This, we fear, is going to be the question. Who let the dogs in?
I see that amongst the reforms Sunak has dropped, less publicised, has been the requirement for landlords to ensure their properties are C rated for energy efficiency at least.
This is absurd.
If you want to be a landlord your property should be of a decent standard and habitable. Expecting tenants to pay through the nose for energy because landlords can't be bothered to make homes habitable is utterly insane.
Shame on Sunak.
The 'EPC rating' has nothing to do with the quality of accommodation. It is a rating system for energy efficiency. The incoming requirement to achieve a set 'level' to let out properties out has been a major contributory factor in private landlords exiting the market. This has, in combination with other things, pushed up rents by hundreds of pounds a month across the entirety of UK because of a shortage of supply. The energy savings from the measures come at great cost (ie double glazing) and hassle, and probably save a few quid a month to tenants. Instead they are replacing it with what seems like a better system, incentivising the upgrades through grants.
The savings are more than a few quid. My current place has an EPC score of 87 (a high 'B'), and my gas + electric bill is about £65/month. The unrefurbished but otherwise-identical flat next door has a score of 67 (so a 'D' rating), and has a projected primary energy use that's just over 2.1x mine. The only comparable E-rated place on my street uses 4.6x more energy per sq metre. That's a lot.
The regulations as they currently stand are about setting a reasonable floor, not enforcing best practice. They're intended to ratchet up at a steady pace (one grade every 8 years, is it?) that roughly fits with normal landlord refurbishment schedules.
When the grade E floor came in, it had a cost cap of £3,500 - if the necessary improvements cost more than that, then an exemption would be granted. And there were local authority grants and government-supported finance options available to fund it. Presumably something similar would have applied to the future steps of the ratchet.
I realise that EPCs are fairly crude with a number of potential edge cases like yours. But a more accurate system would likely cost much more to run, with much more intrusive inspections needed.
If the government is now proposing to incentivise improvements purely by providing grants, how are they going to be measuring the effect of the money they'll be spending? Presumably they'll still be using EPCs? Or are they proposing to just blindly piss money up the wall in the hope that some of it will flow somewhere useful?
Really, it's almost like they haven't thought this through at all.
It is hard to express how stupid these rules are for period properties.
The recommendations for my property are 1. internal or external wall insulation. Comment. This would either destroy the appearance of the outside of the building or alternatively wreck all of its internal period features, ie the architraves and mouldings. notwithstanding the cost (£4000-£14000), for an estimated saving of £460 per year. (so about a third of the total heating bill... which I am highly sceptical of).
2. Double glazing Comment. The property has handmade timber windows that date back to when it was built. There are a total of over 70 individual windows. The EPC recommends ripping all these out and replacing it with double glazing, ie factory made plastic windows which can only be regarded as an act of architectural vandalism. The 'typical yearly saving' of this would be, wait for it.... £41.
Double glazed sash and other repro windows exist. No plastic involved.
There are insulation options for period properties - internal - that while thinner and more expensive, do actually work.
Edit: if 70 windows are only leaking £41 worth of heat, then you should have them examined by experts. Those 70 windows are a revolution in insulation, just by themselves.
We are about a third of the way through replacing our leaky single glazed sashes with double glazed versions - all wooden box sashes, sash cords, the works. Just counting up I think we now have 9 double glazed out of 21 so closer to half, including 2 of the biggest ones.
I agree wall insulation is difficult. I regret we didn’t put some internal wall lining in when we reconfigured this place (it was an old derelict United services club so we had to reinstate much of the cornicing anyway, using a company that take moulds of originals).
I am considering doing the windows at the front but this is because there is a road noise issue, we are right next to a busy road. So it is really driven by noise issues rather than thermal insulation. The windows at the rear already have secondary glazing which is what conservation officers always recommend instead of replacing windows. It is quite surprising this didn't have a more positive impact on the EPC. I'm not sure about the idea of wall insulation - but appreciate you could essentially reconstruct some of the walls to be more insulated. It would be very expensive for limited benefit. In our case the total cost of these works would at a conservative estimate be around £50k. They would never be recovered at the point of sale.
Carefully done done secondary glazing can be very unobtrusive.
In our family's listed small manor house (4 bed, 5000 sqft) we had a lot of original Georgian sash windows with some original glass.
For the windows that did not have to be replaced due to rottenness (place was empty for years when they bought it), we had a local glazier (local man who worked out of a shed) supply toughened panes of glass slightly smaller than the inside window opening, with polished edges. We then held these against the frame with a foam bead the frame side to cut draughts, and mirror hinges.
Depending on the window, we would either remove them in summer or leave them up all year round. With a remove and clean the inside-side every year or two.
Very unobtrusive, and they worked very well for the 20+ years we had them.
The way to do it is to do one, or one room, and see if it is effective.
Hope you find your answer.
Blimey, 5000 sq ft and only 4 bedrooms?
You forgot the ballroom, game hanging room, estate office, etc. etc.
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
Dog owners need to be held responsible for attacks by their dogs in exactly the same way as they would be if they had personally attacked someone themselves.
They are already responsible, under the Dangerous Dogs Act Section 3. Though I am not sure if I would extend this to putting the owner down. And "be *held* responsible" is perhaps the issue.
(1)If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1 any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—
(a)the owner; and (b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
I was suddenly reminded of Martin Amis's Lionel Asbo.
"Lionel Asbo is a "brutally generic" yob. He looks a bit like Wayne Rooney: "the slab-like body, the full lump of the face, the tight-shaved crown with its tawny stubble"." (guardian)
"Who let the dogs in? …This, we fear, is going to be the question. Who let the dogs in?
Who let the dogs in? Who? Who?"
Prescient as ever...
My better half has a theory that dog owners tend to look a bit like their dogs and share similar characteristics and behaviour - and vice versa. I think she may have a point.
Dog owners need to be held responsible for attacks by their dogs in exactly the same way as they would be if they had personally attacked someone themselves.
They are already responsible, under the Dangerous Dogs Act Section 3. Though I am not sure if I would extend this to putting the owner down. And "be *held* responsible" is perhaps the issue.
(1)If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1 any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—
(a)the owner; and (b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
I was suddenly reminded of Martin Amis's Lionel Asbo.
"Lionel Asbo is a "brutally generic" yob. He looks a bit like Wayne Rooney: "the slab-like body, the full lump of the face, the tight-shaved crown with its tawny stubble"." (guardian)
"Who let the dogs in? …This, we fear, is going to be the question. Who let the dogs in?
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
You support vandalism and the waste of public money, as well as endangering children and other members of the public? Well I never.
I do no such thing and shame on you
I do not support vandalism but this is real and needs to be addresed
But what does the vandalism show?
Only that the number of people angry enough about this to go out with spray paint is greater than zero.
See also: people vandalising ULEZ cameras.
We don't get much political graffiti in the UK. Probably for the best. But when I was in Spain, there was loads. Mostly by miniscule parties nobody had head of. Graffiti and vandalism tell us nothing about What The People Think.
Dog owners need to be held responsible for attacks by their dogs in exactly the same way as they would be if they had personally attacked someone themselves.
They are already responsible, under the Dangerous Dogs Act Section 3. Though I am not sure if I would extend this to putting the owner down. And "be *held* responsible" is perhaps the issue.
(1)If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1 any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—
(a)the owner; and (b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
I found this bit of Section 10 (Interpretation) to be interesting:
(3)For the purposes of this Act a dog shall be regarded as dangerously out of control on any occasion on which there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person[F2 or assistance dog ], whether or not it actually does so, but references to a dog injuring a person[F3 or assistance dog ] or there being grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will do so do not include references to any case in which the dog is being used for a lawful purpose by a constable or a person in the service of the Crown.
Which is much broader than I would have expected. I can see why people use the Dangerous Dogs Act as an example of poor legislation - sweeping powers with no clear direction on who's responsible for enforcing them.
It's interesting that, for all Sunak's recent bandwagon-jumping, he has completely failed to announce any additional funding for local authority dog wardens.
I wouldn't like to be a RSPCA/SSPCA/Battersea Dogs' Home/Dog Aid Society volunteer, either.
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
They are displayed whenever the speed drops from 30 or even 40 and are the new 20mph zones not previous ones
And let me reiterate, i do not support any vandalism and the way this must be resolved is through the Senedd and LAs addressing local concerns and any suggestions otherwise is unacceptable
As someone who lives in Wales, my only comment on the 20mph speed limit is that when I first heard about it, I thought it was a bit "Doing something for the sake of being different to England", but now it's happened, I'm not too fussed, and will probably be used to it soon.
Now can we talk about something less controversial? Like the effect of listening to Radiohead while eating a pineapple pizza on people's views on Brexit?
Rishi Sunak draws up plans to slash inheritance tax
Targeting ‘the most hated tax in Britain’ is just one of the crowd-pleasing policy changes in the mix for the Tory conference
Rishi Sunak is drawing up plans to slash inheritance tax, which his officials have called “the most hated tax in Britain”.
Cutting the levy before eventually abolishing it entirely is one of a raft of crowd-pleasing announcements being considered before next month’s Conservative Party conference.
As part of his pledge to announce a series of long-term decisions designed to change Britain, Sunak would frame the policy as an “aspirational offer to voteFrs” ahead of the general election....
...Three sources confirmed that there is a live discussion at the highest level of government about reforming inheritance tax. One proposal being considered is for Sunak to announce his intention to phase out the levy by reducing the 40 per cent inheritance tax rate in the budget in March, while setting out a pathway to abolish it completely in future years.
This would tally with comments made last week by Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, that there would be no tax cuts when he presents his latest plan at the end of November.
It would also make inheritance tax an election issue and put Sir Keir Starmer on the spot about whether he was prepared to make the same cuts in years to come.
Fucking hell. It's only a day or two after they announced that there's not going to be room to reduce taxes given the current economic outlook. And now Sunak's changed his mind already. This government is swerving all over the place, doing at least two handbrake turns every day. Who can trust anything they say?
By the end of this conference season, he'll have announced that he's re-instating his meat tax, abolished it again, brought it back at double the rate, and committed to a consultation on a complex system of rebates based on the number of bins you have.
That's the key thing.
A lot of the response to this week's announcements has been a cynical weary shrug. Only the terminally loyal think that Sunak is doing it for good reasons. The default response is that it's pointless gimmickry.
This iteration of the Conservative party broke through the Trust Thermocline a while back. Possibly with late Johnson, maybe with Truss. Point is, the break is decisive, and Rishi can't pull them back into warmer waters. Major managed it after Maggie. And Johnson after May. But it's not easy.
Cameron was able to pull off his IHT cut because he was new and not actively distrusted. Sunak is. Labour won't need to say "multi millionaire cuts tax for rich people", because many voters will be thinking it anyway.
Imagine a couple. One of them starts buying desirable, but expensive, gifts for the other.
At a certain point in the decay of the relationship, the recipient doesn't think "what a lovely (if expensive) gesture". Instead they think "what are they guilty about?"
That's the Trust Thermocline. My contention is that the Conservatives passed that a while back, and even if they do or promise good things, they won't be credited for doing them.
See also: Major's government post autumn 1992.
What's the betting Reeves has a plan up her sleeves for if Rollercoaster Rishi announces IHT scrapped/curtailed?
CGT on all inheritances, as being capital transfers. And there would be a cast iron argument for that. Moreover, as the parental home would not be the residence ofd the transferee ...
Actually that's not bad. Less than the 40% but applied to all. But ditch most of the exemptions e.g. rich who hand on plots of trees.
Oh wait. Isn't this the "death tax" that the tories and daily mail destroyed towards the end of iirc Brown's premiership???
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
They are displayed whenever the speed drops from 30 or even 40 and are the new 20mph zones not previous ones
And let me reiterate, i do not support any vandalism and the way this must be resolved is through the Senedd and LAs addressing local concerns and any suggestions otherwise is unacceptable
Sorry to have hurt your feelings. I wasn't being serious, but apologies anyway. On my second glass of rose while waiting for the potatoes to soften ...
Dog owners need to be held responsible for attacks by their dogs in exactly the same way as they would be if they had personally attacked someone themselves.
They are already responsible, under the Dangerous Dogs Act Section 3. Though I am not sure if I would extend this to putting the owner down. And "be *held* responsible" is perhaps the issue.
(1)If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1 any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—
(a)the owner; and (b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
I was suddenly reminded of Martin Amis's Lionel Asbo.
"Lionel Asbo is a "brutally generic" yob. He looks a bit like Wayne Rooney: "the slab-like body, the full lump of the face, the tight-shaved crown with its tawny stubble"." (guardian)
"Who let the dogs in? …This, we fear, is going to be the question. Who let the dogs in?
Who let the dogs in? Who? Who?"
Prescient as ever...
My better half has a theory that dog owners tend to look a bit like their dogs and share similar characteristics and behaviour - and vice versa. I think she may have a point.
I used to know a civil servant who worked on the 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act. She said a lot of work went into identifying the breeds most likely to be owned by Labour voters or those not registered to vote and to avoid banning breeds likely to be owned by middle class Conservative voters.
Rishi Sunak draws up plans to slash inheritance tax
Targeting ‘the most hated tax in Britain’ is just one of the crowd-pleasing policy changes in the mix for the Tory conference
Rishi Sunak is drawing up plans to slash inheritance tax, which his officials have called “the most hated tax in Britain”.
Cutting the levy before eventually abolishing it entirely is one of a raft of crowd-pleasing announcements being considered before next month’s Conservative Party conference.
As part of his pledge to announce a series of long-term decisions designed to change Britain, Sunak would frame the policy as an “aspirational offer to voteFrs” ahead of the general election....
...Three sources confirmed that there is a live discussion at the highest level of government about reforming inheritance tax. One proposal being considered is for Sunak to announce his intention to phase out the levy by reducing the 40 per cent inheritance tax rate in the budget in March, while setting out a pathway to abolish it completely in future years.
This would tally with comments made last week by Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, that there would be no tax cuts when he presents his latest plan at the end of November.
It would also make inheritance tax an election issue and put Sir Keir Starmer on the spot about whether he was prepared to make the same cuts in years to come.
Fucking hell. It's only a day or two after they announced that there's not going to be room to reduce taxes given the current economic outlook. And now Sunak's changed his mind already. This government is swerving all over the place, doing at least two handbrake turns every day. Who can trust anything they say?
By the end of this conference season, he'll have announced that he's re-instating his meat tax, abolished it again, brought it back at double the rate, and committed to a consultation on a complex system of rebates based on the number of bins you have.
That's the key thing.
A lot of the response to this week's announcements has been a cynical weary shrug. Only the terminally loyal think that Sunak is doing it for good reasons. The default response is that it's pointless gimmickry.
This iteration of the Conservative party broke through the Trust Thermocline a while back. Possibly with late Johnson, maybe with Truss. Point is, the break is decisive, and Rishi can't pull them back into warmer waters. Major managed it after Maggie. And Johnson after May. But it's not easy.
Cameron was able to pull off his IHT cut because he was new and not actively distrusted. Sunak is. Labour won't need to say "multi millionaire cuts tax for rich people", because many voters will be thinking it anyway.
Imagine a couple. One of them starts buying desirable, but expensive, gifts for the other.
At a certain point in the decay of the relationship, the recipient doesn't think "what a lovely (if expensive) gesture". Instead they think "what are they guilty about?"
That's the Trust Thermocline. My contention is that the Conservatives passed that a while back, and even if they do or promise good things, they won't be credited for doing them.
See also: Major's government post autumn 1992.
What's the betting Reeves has a plan up her sleeves for if Rollercoaster Rishi announces IHT scrapped/curtailed?
CGT on all inheritances, as being capital transfers. And there would be a cast iron argument for that. Moreover, as the parental home would not be the residence ofd the transferee ...
Actually that's not bad. Less than the 40% but applied to all. But ditch most of the exemptions e.g. rich who hand on plots of trees.
Oh wait. Isn't this the "death tax" that the tories and daily mail destroyed towards the end of iirc Brown's premiership???
Intderestingly, agricultural land is exempt from CGT.
I see that amongst the reforms Sunak has dropped, less publicised, has been the requirement for landlords to ensure their properties are C rated for energy efficiency at least.
This is absurd.
If you want to be a landlord your property should be of a decent standard and habitable. Expecting tenants to pay through the nose for energy because landlords can't be bothered to make homes habitable is utterly insane.
Shame on Sunak.
The 'EPC rating' has nothing to do with the quality of accommodation. It is a rating system for energy efficiency. The incoming requirement to achieve a set 'level' to let out properties out has been a major contributory factor in private landlords exiting the market. This has, in combination with other things, pushed up rents by hundreds of pounds a month across the entirety of UK because of a shortage of supply. The energy savings from the measures come at great cost (ie double glazing) and hassle, and probably save a few quid a month to tenants. Instead they are replacing it with what seems like a better system, incentivising the upgrades through grants.
Having to pay hundreds extra for gas and electricity each year because of poor quality draughty homes that don't have basic insulation is absolutely to do with the quality of accommodation.
As for any slumlords who leave the market because they don't want their homes to meet a minimum quality for their tenants - good riddance!
I'm with you on this one, Bart.
Crazy policy by Rishi. LMF.
They have a successful programme that has delivered major benefits over a long period, and he cans it in search of Schrodinger's Tory Voter.
As an accidental landlord my view is it is great that there is a programme pushing the rental sector towards much more energy efficiency.
But... government needs to meet half way over costs. Because they are not mandating owner-occupiers to do all this remedial work in their own homes so it seems a little unfair to say 'only landlords must do this'.
When the minimum EPC was last raised in 2018 there were grants and subsidised finance schemes available, and a price cap of £3,500 - if meeting the standard would cost more than that, an exemption would be granted. That feels like "meeting halfway to me".
I do agree about the importance of encouraging owner-occupiers to keep up. I guess the main point of leverage there will be from mortgage providers who will want to know that the property can be rented out if the buyer's circumstances change.
From the graph that @MattW posted earlier in the thread, it does look like owner-occupiers have tracked quite closely to private landlords so far: both have risen by about 20 points (two rating bands) since the beginning of the century.
As someone who lives in Wales, my only comment on the 20mph speed limit is that when I first heard about it, I thought it was a bit "Doing something for the sake of being different to England", but now it's happened, I'm not too fussed, and will probably be used to it soon.
Now can we talk about something less controversial? Like the effect of listening to Radiohead while eating a pineapple pizza on people's views on Brexit?
If you must eat pizza while driving, everyone will be safer if you're doing it at lower speeds.
SNP MSPs have been reprimanded by their chief whip for going Awol during by-election campaigning in Rutherglen after being excused from parliament to canvass voters.
In a leaked message from the party’s WhatsApp group, Rona Mackay warns colleagues to make the “crucial by-election” their “top priority” after lamenting the failure of MSPs to turn up to campaign.
The SNP is operating a rota that allows MSPs to miss Holyrood sessions to electioneer in Rutherglen & Hamilton West, the former seat of Margaret Ferrier, who was ousted via a recall petition after breach of Covid rules.
Despite a recent upturn in support for the SNP in a Times YouGov poll, the bookmakers have Labour candidate Michael Shanks as the strong odds-on favourite, with the SNP’s Katy Loudon at 8-1 and the Conservative candidate, Thomas Kerr, at 50-1.
In Mackay’s message, posted on Friday and leaked to The Sunday Times, she rebuked the entire Scottish parliament group after only a handful turned up to Rutherglen.
“Folks, as you know I’m slipping two groups every parliamentary day to go to Rutherglen,” she wrote. “On Wednesday, there were two MSPs there, myself and a minister. I understand three members were there yesterday. Please be clear you are only being slipped for the by-election . . . We’re less than two weeks away from this crucial by-election. Please make it your top priority.”
With less than a fortnight until polling, one veteran SNP MP has described the ground campaign in Rutherglen as “the worst-supported in any by-election by ordinary activists in living memory, with mainly MPs, MSPs, councillors and party staffers doing the legwork”.
A SNP spokesman said that members from across Scotland were uniting to lead a “positive campaign” to elect Loudon as the “real alternative to Westminster’s cost of living crisis”.
I see that amongst the reforms Sunak has dropped, less publicised, has been the requirement for landlords to ensure their properties are C rated for energy efficiency at least.
This is absurd.
If you want to be a landlord your property should be of a decent standard and habitable. Expecting tenants to pay through the nose for energy because landlords can't be bothered to make homes habitable is utterly insane.
Shame on Sunak.
The 'EPC rating' has nothing to do with the quality of accommodation. It is a rating system for energy efficiency. The incoming requirement to achieve a set 'level' to let out properties out has been a major contributory factor in private landlords exiting the market. This has, in combination with other things, pushed up rents by hundreds of pounds a month across the entirety of UK because of a shortage of supply. The energy savings from the measures come at great cost (ie double glazing) and hassle, and probably save a few quid a month to tenants. Instead they are replacing it with what seems like a better system, incentivising the upgrades through grants.
The savings are more than a few quid. My current place has an EPC score of 87 (a high 'B'), and my gas + electric bill is about £65/month. The unrefurbished but otherwise-identical flat next door has a score of 67 (so a 'D' rating), and has a projected primary energy use that's just over 2.1x mine. The only comparable E-rated place on my street uses 4.6x more energy per sq metre. That's a lot.
The regulations as they currently stand are about setting a reasonable floor, not enforcing best practice. They're intended to ratchet up at a steady pace (one grade every 8 years, is it?) that roughly fits with normal landlord refurbishment schedules.
When the grade E floor came in, it had a cost cap of £3,500 - if the necessary improvements cost more than that, then an exemption would be granted. And there were local authority grants and government-supported finance options available to fund it. Presumably something similar would have applied to the future steps of the ratchet.
I realise that EPCs are fairly crude with a number of potential edge cases like yours. But a more accurate system would likely cost much more to run, with much more intrusive inspections needed.
If the government is now proposing to incentivise improvements purely by providing grants, how are they going to be measuring the effect of the money they'll be spending? Presumably they'll still be using EPCs? Or are they proposing to just blindly piss money up the wall in the hope that some of it will flow somewhere useful?
Really, it's almost like they haven't thought this through at all.
It is hard to express how stupid these rules are for period properties.
The recommendations for my property are 1. internal or external wall insulation. Comment. This would either destroy the appearance of the outside of the building or alternatively wreck all of its internal period features, ie the architraves and mouldings. notwithstanding the cost (£4000-£14000), for an estimated saving of £460 per year. (so about a third of the total heating bill... which I am highly sceptical of).
2. Double glazing Comment. The property has handmade timber windows that date back to when it was built. There are a total of over 70 individual windows. The EPC recommends ripping all these out and replacing it with double glazing, ie factory made plastic windows which can only be regarded as an act of architectural vandalism. The 'typical yearly saving' of this would be, wait for it.... £41.
Double glazed sash and other repro windows exist. No plastic involved.
There are insulation options for period properties - internal - that while thinner and more expensive, do actually work.
Edit: if 70 windows are only leaking £41 worth of heat, then you should have them examined by experts. Those 70 windows are a revolution in insulation, just by themselves.
Of just go to Storm Windows who specialise in period properties
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
They are displayed whenever the speed drops from 30 or even 40 and are the new 20mph zones not previous ones
And let me reiterate, i do not support any vandalism and the way this must be resolved is through the Senedd and LAs addressing local concerns and any suggestions otherwise is unacceptable
Sorry to have hurt your feelings. I wasn't being serious, but apologies anyway. On my second glass of rose while waiting for the potatoes to soften ...
Thank you and it is appreciated
I consider the vandalism to be counter productive and there is a genuine case for a revision to some roads whilst retaining the legislation
I have already stated I do not support the conservative party on this and just want common sense to break out
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
They are displayed whenever the speed drops from 30 or even 40 and are the new 20mph zones not previous ones
And let me reiterate, i do not support any vandalism and the way this must be resolved is through the Senedd and LAs addressing local concerns and any suggestions otherwise is unacceptable
Sorry to have hurt your feelings. I wasn't being serious, but apologies anyway. On my second glass of rose while waiting for the potatoes to soften ...
Correct, @Big_G_NorthWales - I added a "what about at the edge of town?" as an update.
I'd be interested in the dot and tittle on that one, since a painted out sign at the start of a "default" zone makes it ambiguous for some distance.
The speed limit won't be the same as before the start of the default zone (lamp posts, no repeater signs), since aiui a non-default speed limit requires repeater signs showing the non-default speed limit at an interval of iirc a maximum 400m.
So I'd say that 400m inside a default speed-limit zone with a painted out sign, it is clear that the default limit applies because of the lack of repeater signs saying something else.
They *could*, but won't, do it like STOP and GIVEWAY signs and give the 20mph sign a unique shape such that it can be understood when obscured.
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
You support vandalism and the waste of public money, as well as endangering children and other members of the public? Well I never.
I do no such thing and shame on you
I do not support vandalism but this is real and needs to be addresed
But what does the vandalism show?
Only that the number of people angry enough about this to go out with spray paint is greater than zero.
See also: people vandalising ULEZ cameras.
We don't get much political graffiti in the UK. Probably for the best. But when I was in Spain, there was loads. Mostly by miniscule parties nobody had head of. Graffiti and vandalism tell us nothing about What The People Think.
They think Emily is a slag if round here is owt to go by.
Rishi Sunak draws up plans to slash inheritance tax
Targeting ‘the most hated tax in Britain’ is just one of the crowd-pleasing policy changes in the mix for the Tory conference
Rishi Sunak is drawing up plans to slash inheritance tax, which his officials have called “the most hated tax in Britain”.
Cutting the levy before eventually abolishing it entirely is one of a raft of crowd-pleasing announcements being considered before next month’s Conservative Party conference.
As part of his pledge to announce a series of long-term decisions designed to change Britain, Sunak would frame the policy as an “aspirational offer to voteFrs” ahead of the general election....
...Three sources confirmed that there is a live discussion at the highest level of government about reforming inheritance tax. One proposal being considered is for Sunak to announce his intention to phase out the levy by reducing the 40 per cent inheritance tax rate in the budget in March, while setting out a pathway to abolish it completely in future years.
This would tally with comments made last week by Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, that there would be no tax cuts when he presents his latest plan at the end of November.
It would also make inheritance tax an election issue and put Sir Keir Starmer on the spot about whether he was prepared to make the same cuts in years to come.
Fucking hell. It's only a day or two after they announced that there's not going to be room to reduce taxes given the current economic outlook. And now Sunak's changed his mind already. This government is swerving all over the place, doing at least two handbrake turns every day. Who can trust anything they say?
By the end of this conference season, he'll have announced that he's re-instating his meat tax, abolished it again, brought it back at double the rate, and committed to a consultation on a complex system of rebates based on the number of bins you have.
That's the key thing.
A lot of the response to this week's announcements has been a cynical weary shrug. Only the terminally loyal think that Sunak is doing it for good reasons. The default response is that it's pointless gimmickry.
This iteration of the Conservative party broke through the Trust Thermocline a while back. Possibly with late Johnson, maybe with Truss. Point is, the break is decisive, and Rishi can't pull them back into warmer waters. Major managed it after Maggie. And Johnson after May. But it's not easy.
Cameron was able to pull off his IHT cut because he was new and not actively distrusted. Sunak is. Labour won't need to say "multi millionaire cuts tax for rich people", because many voters will be thinking it anyway.
Imagine a couple. One of them starts buying desirable, but expensive, gifts for the other.
At a certain point in the decay of the relationship, the recipient doesn't think "what a lovely (if expensive) gesture". Instead they think "what are they guilty about?"
That's the Trust Thermocline. My contention is that the Conservatives passed that a while back, and even if they do or promise good things, they won't be credited for doing them.
See also: Major's government post autumn 1992.
What's the betting Reeves has a plan up her sleeves for if Rollercoaster Rishi announces IHT scrapped/curtailed?
CGT on all inheritances, as being capital transfers. And there would be a cast iron argument for that. Moreover, as the parental home would not be the residence ofd the transferee ...
Actually that's not bad. Less than the 40% but applied to all. But ditch most of the exemptions e.g. rich who hand on plots of trees.
Oh wait. Isn't this the "death tax" that the tories and daily mail destroyed towards the end of iirc Brown's premiership???
Intderestingly, agricultural land is exempt from CGT.
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
They are displayed whenever the speed drops from 30 or even 40 and are the new 20mph zones not previous ones
And let me reiterate, i do not support any vandalism and the way this must be resolved is through the Senedd and LAs addressing local concerns and any suggestions otherwise is unacceptable
Sorry to have hurt your feelings. I wasn't being serious, but apologies anyway. On my second glass of rose while waiting for the potatoes to soften ...
Thank you and it is appreciated
I consider the vandalism to be counter productive and there is a genuine case for a revision to some roads whilst retaining the legislation
I have already stated I do not support the conservative party on this and just want common sense to break out
Common sense and Welsh politics have been strangers for literally centuries.
Cromwell tried to introduce them in 1536 with the Laws in Wales Acts but even that was buggered when Henry gave Haverfordwest its own MP. And since then - nothing.
Is the sentence for Causing Death By Dangerous Driving different for that for Manslaughter?
If so, why?
Max sentence was different until last year; now Causing Death by Dangerous Driving can also carry a life sentence. Not sure about low end sentences.
There may be interesting differences in aggravating and mitigating factors I expect, but I don't think updated sentencing guidelines for CDDD are published yet.
I know this triggers some but our son called round and said that he has not met anyone, either at work or socially, that is supportive of the new 20mph zone and even Plaid supporters he works with are angry
The petition administered by the Senedd is now at an astonishing 403,000 votes and continues to grow
There will be some who are trying to debase the petition, but this has become the major story in Wales and hopefully common sense reviews by LA'S will take place
Wasn't there a header on PB recently showing there was more support than opposition.
There are always good reasons why someone might not meet people who admit to certain views. Could be there aren't many people with that view, or maybe the person is overbearing and people just don't want the argument. Or they only mix with people with certain views. Or they might just be lying.
Look to the polling. Or at least tell us your son's methodology.
On that poll it is qualified by where cars mix with pedestrians and cyclists
I hope you are not inferring my son is misleading me but he works in IT in education and not one of his colleagues has a good word to say about the implementation, furthermore his friends and social contacts are the same
Ironically my son in law has just phoned and said he is not finding anyone in favour and remarked that one of the 20mph zones was 60mph not long ago
Over 400,000 signature on a Senedd petition is unprecedented and it will result in some changes to the new speed limits
I'm not inferring or even implying anything. I'm listing the reasons why anecdotes are worse than data.
Did we ever work out how many of these 400,000 signatures are actually people in Wales, and not just randos dialling it in from afar after having googled "Welsh postcodes"?
Again you are attempting to debase the petition
According to the Senedd petitions committee - 20,535 (5.069%) are English, 814 (0.201%) Scots, and 137 (0.034%) are Northern Irish , leaving 383,207 (94.598%) Welsh
In all elections or petitions there will be those with malign intent, but it seems the Senedd committee does require verification of e mails and I am sure they will provide detailed information on their petition in due course including those votes rejected by them
And to all those in England endorsing Wales action I look forward to them lobbying Starmer to implement the same policy in England
I just signed the petition, giving a fake Welsh postcode.
I signed it as "Dylan Thomas"
405,322 signatures We’ve added your signature to the petition
Dead easy to fake it. Took me less than a minute.
Just adds to the numbers that will be published and will not as you hope debase is
Doesn't it prove to you that there's a bit of a flaw in the system?
No - because the numbers trying to debase the official Senedd petition will be small compared to the 400,000 plus already signed and it actually is self defeating as the petition keeps growing which is already in the stratosphere for Wales
Furthermore Drakeford is hardly going to address the Senedd and accuse it of being a fake petition
How do you know the numbers are small?
You can sign it from anywhere, and as long as you put a Welsh postcode in, it counts.
I presume you've signed it. How can they tell your genuine signature from my fake one? You're just assuming that most are genuine because that's the conclusion you want to see. I'm putting the evidence right in front of you that says you cannot trust this as being true. You have no idea how many fakes there are. No idea at all.
Frankly it is of no consequence as the public see the numbers, the media report the numbers, the Senedd petitions committee will confirm the numbers, and it will be debated and changes happen, most likely at LA level
It ought to be of consequence to you, and anyone who is truly concerned about the real popularity of this policy.
You're being shown that there are real doubts about something you believe, and you're demonstrating a fierce and determined lack of curiosity about it.
And you'll be back on here tomorrow saying "meh meh I know this will trigger some people but meh meh five billion signatures". And you'll go on pretending that you think it's real and that the people on here reading your post think it's real.
Anyone can see there are big problems with this. Anyone, apart from those who furiously want to not see it.
This is the counter to your comments
'We'll paint them quicker than they can replace them' threat to 20mph signs
You support vandalism and the waste of public money, as well as endangering children and other members of the public? Well I never.
I do no such thing and shame on you
I do not support vandalism but this is real and needs to be addresed
But what does the vandalism show?
Only that the number of people angry enough about this to go out with spray paint is greater than zero.
See also: people vandalising ULEZ cameras.
We don't get much political graffiti in the UK. Probably for the best. But when I was in Spain, there was loads. Mostly by miniscule parties nobody had head of. Graffiti and vandalism tell us nothing about What The People Think.
They think Emily is a slag if round here is owt to go by.
Really? I would never have thought it of Thornberry.
We have my mother in law staying this weekend, I've managed to wriggle out of dinner because my daughter is feeling poorly and someone had to stay home with her. I've never known half a day to drag for so long.
Rishi Sunak draws up plans to slash inheritance tax
Targeting ‘the most hated tax in Britain’ is just one of the crowd-pleasing policy changes in the mix for the Tory conference
Rishi Sunak is drawing up plans to slash inheritance tax, which his officials have called “the most hated tax in Britain”.
Cutting the levy before eventually abolishing it entirely is one of a raft of crowd-pleasing announcements being considered before next month’s Conservative Party conference.
As part of his pledge to announce a series of long-term decisions designed to change Britain, Sunak would frame the policy as an “aspirational offer to voteFrs” ahead of the general election....
...Three sources confirmed that there is a live discussion at the highest level of government about reforming inheritance tax. One proposal being considered is for Sunak to announce his intention to phase out the levy by reducing the 40 per cent inheritance tax rate in the budget in March, while setting out a pathway to abolish it completely in future years.
This would tally with comments made last week by Jeremy Hunt, the chancellor, that there would be no tax cuts when he presents his latest plan at the end of November.
It would also make inheritance tax an election issue and put Sir Keir Starmer on the spot about whether he was prepared to make the same cuts in years to come.
Fucking hell. It's only a day or two after they announced that there's not going to be room to reduce taxes given the current economic outlook. And now Sunak's changed his mind already. This government is swerving all over the place, doing at least two handbrake turns every day. Who can trust anything they say?
By the end of this conference season, he'll have announced that he's re-instating his meat tax, abolished it again, brought it back at double the rate, and committed to a consultation on a complex system of rebates based on the number of bins you have.
That's the key thing.
A lot of the response to this week's announcements has been a cynical weary shrug. Only the terminally loyal think that Sunak is doing it for good reasons. The default response is that it's pointless gimmickry.
This iteration of the Conservative party broke through the Trust Thermocline a while back. Possibly with late Johnson, maybe with Truss. Point is, the break is decisive, and Rishi can't pull them back into warmer waters. Major managed it after Maggie. And Johnson after May. But it's not easy.
Cameron was able to pull off his IHT cut because he was new and not actively distrusted. Sunak is. Labour won't need to say "multi millionaire cuts tax for rich people", because many voters will be thinking it anyway.
Imagine a couple. One of them starts buying desirable, but expensive, gifts for the other.
At a certain point in the decay of the relationship, the recipient doesn't think "what a lovely (if expensive) gesture". Instead they think "what are they guilty about?"
That's the Trust Thermocline. My contention is that the Conservatives passed that a while back, and even if they do or promise good things, they won't be credited for doing them.
See also: Major's government post autumn 1992.
What's the betting Reeves has a plan up her sleeves for if Rollercoaster Rishi announces IHT scrapped/curtailed?
CGT on all inheritances, as being capital transfers. And there would be a cast iron argument for that. Moreover, as the parental home would not be the residence ofd the transferee ...
Actually that's not bad. Less than the 40% but applied to all. But ditch most of the exemptions e.g. rich who hand on plots of trees.
Oh wait. Isn't this the "death tax" that the tories and daily mail destroyed towards the end of iirc Brown's premiership???
Intderestingly, agricultural land is exempt from CGT.
The Duke of Sussex must give due notice if he wishes to stay on a royal estate, The Telegraph understands, after he was denied a room at Windsor Castle earlier this month.
The Duke flew to London for the WellChild Awards, an annual charity event that this year fell on the eve of the first anniversary of Queen Elizabeth II’s death.
Having established that it would be impossible to see his father due to their diary commitments and because the King was at Balmoral, the Duke asked if he could instead stay at Windsor Castle.
The arrangement would have enabled him to easily visit his grandmother’s resting place at St George’s Chapel, Windsor, the following day, which he also asked if he could do.
The visit was the Duke’s first since the Sussexes were evicted from Frogmore Cottage, their former Windsor home. It means they are now “homeless” when on UK soil and must ask permission from Buckingham Palace to stay on one of the royal estates.
Royal sources have stressed that such provision will be made where possible but that the palace must be given suitable warning of any such visit.
The Duke is next expecting to be in the UK in January, when his claim against News Group Newspapers, the publisher of The Sun, for alleged unlawful information gathering is due to be heard at the High Court.
The Duke’s office first contacted Buckingham Palace after confirming his attendance at the WellChild Awards.
It said the Duke would love to see his father and stay with him if at all possible.
However, he was told he would have to put in a formal request. It is unclear whether the King was aware of such correspondence.
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
Is the sentence for Causing Death By Dangerous Driving different for that for Manslaughter?
If so, why?
DDD was brought in years ago when juries were unwilling to convict drivers on manslaughter charges. Sentencing is on a different basis but DDD sentences have risen in recent years.
I see that amongst the reforms Sunak has dropped, less publicised, has been the requirement for landlords to ensure their properties are C rated for energy efficiency at least.
This is absurd.
If you want to be a landlord your property should be of a decent standard and habitable. Expecting tenants to pay through the nose for energy because landlords can't be bothered to make homes habitable is utterly insane.
Shame on Sunak.
The 'EPC rating' has nothing to do with the quality of accommodation. It is a rating system for energy efficiency. The incoming requirement to achieve a set 'level' to let out properties out has been a major contributory factor in private landlords exiting the market. This has, in combination with other things, pushed up rents by hundreds of pounds a month across the entirety of UK because of a shortage of supply. The energy savings from the measures come at great cost (ie double glazing) and hassle, and probably save a few quid a month to tenants. Instead they are replacing it with what seems like a better system, incentivising the upgrades through grants.
Having to pay hundreds extra for gas and electricity each year because of poor quality draughty homes that don't have basic insulation is absolutely to do with the quality of accommodation.
As for any slumlords who leave the market because they don't want their homes to meet a minimum quality for their tenants - good riddance!
I'm with you on this one, Bart.
Crazy policy by Rishi. LMF.
They have a successful programme that has delivered major benefits over a long period, and he cans it in search of Schrodinger's Tory Voter.
As an accidental landlord my view is it is great that there is a programme pushing the rental sector towards much more energy efficiency.
But... government needs to meet half way over costs. Because they are not mandating owner-occupiers to do all this remedial work in their own homes so it seems a little unfair to say 'only landlords must do this'.
When the minimum EPC was last raised in 2018 there were grants and subsidised finance schemes available, and a price cap of £3,500 - if meeting the standard would cost more than that, an exemption would be granted. That feels like "meeting halfway to me".
I do agree about the importance of encouraging owner-occupiers to keep up. I guess the main point of leverage there will be from mortgage providers who will want to know that the property can be rented out if the buyer's circumstances change.
From the graph that @MattW posted earlier in the thread, it does look like owner-occupiers have tracked quite closely to private landlords so far: both have risen by about 20 points (two rating bands) since the beginning of the century.
I'd argue two points:
1 - That LLs have actually caught up. The previous big change was The Housing Act 2005, which introduced all kinds of things like LL licensing and the HHSRS (Housing Health and Safety Rating System).
The HHSRS is a HUGE massively comprehensive Brobdingnagian thing - several hundred pages, and council staff are expected to administer it with minimal training, so it can go badly wrong very easily.
2 - That the OO sector is in 2 strata:
a) 2-2.5 million newbuilds over the recent 15 year period that have high ratings, which are usually not sold to landlords by developer decision and are well ahead of the PRS average, flattering the OO sector average. Similar but smaller differences apply to newbuilds since perhaps 1995 or 2000.
b) Older stock in the OO sector which are unregulated and have therefore fallen behind the PRS. These are the biggest energy drag, as there are far more of them than poor PRS stock.
One structural reason for b) is that it is now an offence to rent out EPC F properties so these have all been renovated, have exited the PRS to the OO sector, or are being rented out illegally.
(Unless the stupid bugger is going to reverse that as well)
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
Johnson showed that you can change voting systems on a partisan whim. So why not?
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
Johnson showed that you can change voting systems on a partisan whim. So why not?
The last time we went round the block on abolishing inheritance tax (July) we asked YouGov to poll it.
Is the priority of just 10% of people, and 16% of Tory voters
As for the politics, I’m pretty confident that of all the things Team Starmer might struggle to land, I think they’ll be ok with “millionaire’s tax cut”
Abolishing inheritance tax outright would be worth up to £290 million to Rishi Sunak's own children - given his wealth of £730 million, and a tax levied at 40% after the first £1 million.
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
Fine. Boris and Dom have shown the way. This is the new world. Get PR done.
Once proper PR (ie STV which is self-evidently the best all round system, not some AV shit) is in place nobody’s going to reverse it, because as a voting system it’s superior.
The last time we went round the block on abolishing inheritance tax (July) we asked YouGov to poll it.
Is the priority of just 10% of people, and 16% of Tory voters
As for the politics, I’m pretty confident that of all the things Team Starmer might struggle to land, I think they’ll be ok with “millionaire’s tax cut”
Abolishing inheritance tax outright would be worth up to £290 million to Rishi Sunak's own children - given his wealth of £730 million, and a tax levied at 40% after the first £1 million.
Big difference between "is not my priority" and "I disagree with it".
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
There’s never been a referendum on PR. There’s been one on AV, which isn’t proportional,
The last time we went round the block on abolishing inheritance tax (July) we asked YouGov to poll it.
Is the priority of just 10% of people, and 16% of Tory voters
As for the politics, I’m pretty confident that of all the things Team Starmer might struggle to land, I think they’ll be ok with “millionaire’s tax cut”
Abolishing inheritance tax outright would be worth up to £290 million to Rishi Sunak's own children - given his wealth of £730 million, and a tax levied at 40% after the first £1 million.
Do you think the Sunak family wealth is in their name/bank account and so vulnerable to inheritance tax? Considering the majority, vast majority, is in trusts and not actually “their” money. Apparently we don’t want cynical politics that uses fake numbers to make a political point after the 2030/35 issue.
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
Johnson showed that you can change voting systems on a partisan whim. So why not?
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
Johnson showed that you can change voting systems on a partisan whim. So why not?
Do you mean voter ID, or something else?
I was referencing the FPTP change for majors and PCCs, looking at the 2019 manifesto it states
"We will continue to support the First Past the Post system of voting, as it allows voters to kick out politicians who don’t deliver, both locally and nationally."
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
Johnson showed that you can change voting systems on a partisan whim. So why not?
Do you mean voter ID, or something else?
I was referencing the FPTP change for majors and PCCs, looking at the 2019 manifesto it states
"We will continue to support the First Past the Post system of voting, as it allows voters to kick out politicians who don’t deliver, both locally and nationally."
so not explicit in there intentions .
But yes, voter ID is the bigun.
Fair enough. Though there is something more sacred about national elections, I would argue.
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
There’s never been a referendum on PR. There’s been one on AV, which isn’t proportional,
Do you think the result would have been different?
The last time we went round the block on abolishing inheritance tax (July) we asked YouGov to poll it.
Is the priority of just 10% of people, and 16% of Tory voters
As for the politics, I’m pretty confident that of all the things Team Starmer might struggle to land, I think they’ll be ok with “millionaire’s tax cut”
Abolishing inheritance tax outright would be worth up to £290 million to Rishi Sunak's own children - given his wealth of £730 million, and a tax levied at 40% after the first £1 million.
You see, whenever an opinion former writes a piece like that about the polling on the "priority", rather than support for the actual underlying policy, you know the core numbers aren't good for them.
We used to see the same, regularly, on here about the Mori index to frame that "no-one cares about Europe" (TM) before the referendum.
Sunak's ratings are still better than Truss' and no other Tory leader would be polling much better.
Rather than have yet another pointless leadership election after they removed election winner Boris, the Conservatives should get behind the reduction of inflation and hence interest rates and restoration of economic growth Sunak and Hunt are focused on
There haven't been any Tory poll leads since December 6th, 2021. Seven months BEFORE Boris resigned.
The Labour lead when Boris resigned was half what it is now and when Truss was leader Labour were up to 30% ahead
I wonder when his critics will admit that getting rid of Boris was a catastrophic error. I know people like to look to challenge the obvious, but ousting a charismatic incumbent who is a proven winner (you can add Cameron to Mayor Livingstone & Corbyn) only to see a humongous slide in the VI polls while both replacements personal ratings tank, is a ricket of biblical proportions
The Tories were behind in the polls for SEVEN months BEFORE Boris resigned.
Tbh it just seems Sunak is having some sort of insular argument with himself. Blue wall will hate his net zero stuff. Red wall and the north will feel aggrieved by possible HS2 cut. Inheritance tax - effects such a small proportion of us. Guessing it’s the right in the party pulling the strings
The last time we went round the block on abolishing inheritance tax (July) we asked YouGov to poll it.
Is the priority of just 10% of people, and 16% of Tory voters
As for the politics, I’m pretty confident that of all the things Team Starmer might struggle to land, I think they’ll be ok with “millionaire’s tax cut”
Abolishing inheritance tax outright would be worth up to £290 million to Rishi Sunak's own children - given his wealth of £730 million, and a tax levied at 40% after the first £1 million.
Sorry, I left off a question - are you a liar or just fucking stupid?
The last time we went round the block on abolishing inheritance tax (July) we asked YouGov to poll it.
Is the priority of just 10% of people, and 16% of Tory voters
As for the politics, I’m pretty confident that of all the things Team Starmer might struggle to land, I think they’ll be ok with “millionaire’s tax cut”
Abolishing inheritance tax outright would be worth up to £290 million to Rishi Sunak's own children - given his wealth of £730 million, and a tax levied at 40% after the first £1 million.
Big difference between "is not my priority" and "I disagree with it".
Up to a point.
But there is a perception that the government is frantically running round looking for spending to cut.
And there is a perception that a lot of schools and hospitals are about to fall down
Doesn't matter how accurate those perceptions are. They're what the public think.
It's at least possible that a very wealthy and not particularly liked PM running with a tax cut that benefits wealthy people and does naff all for incentives to work...
... might be as popular as a bucket of cold sick at an "all you can eat" buffet.
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
There’s never been a referendum on PR. There’s been one on AV, which isn’t proportional,
Do you think the result would have been different?
I voted against AV precisely because it's non-proportional.
The last time we went round the block on abolishing inheritance tax (July) we asked YouGov to poll it.
Is the priority of just 10% of people, and 16% of Tory voters
As for the politics, I’m pretty confident that of all the things Team Starmer might struggle to land, I think they’ll be ok with “millionaire’s tax cut”
Abolishing inheritance tax outright would be worth up to £290 million to Rishi Sunak's own children - given his wealth of £730 million, and a tax levied at 40% after the first £1 million.
Big difference between "is not my priority" and "I disagree with it".
Up to a point.
But there is a perception that the government is frantically running round looking for spending to cut.
And there is a perception that a lit of schools and hospitals are about to fall down
Doesn't matter how accurate those perceptions are. They're what the public think.
It's at least possible that a very wealthy and not particularly liked PM running with a tax cut that benefits wealthy people and does naff all for incentives to work...
... might be as popular as a bucket of cold sick at an "all you can eat" buffet.
Es\pecially if it emerges how the really wealthy don't really pay it at all. Which raises at least one hypersensitive issue at the current time.
Tbh it just seems Sunak is having some sort of insular argument with himself. Blue wall will hate his net zero stuff. Red wall and the north will feel aggrieved by possible HS2 cut. Inheritance tax - effects such a small proportion of us. Guessing it’s the right in the party pulling the strings
Remember: nothing - absolutely nothing - will be done here without it first being extensively polled and focus grouped. These ideas aren't simply dreamed up on ConHome and then spat out there to see if it sticks.
There is some political risk in its delivery, and its timing, but also opportunity in how the Opposition may respond, or screw up a response.
In politics, you think, you test, you make the call, and you place your bets where you can.
Tbh it just seems Sunak is having some sort of insular argument with himself. Blue wall will hate his net zero stuff. Red wall and the north will feel aggrieved by possible HS2 cut. Inheritance tax - effects such a small proportion of us. Guessing it’s the right in the party pulling the strings
Remember: nothing - absolutely nothing - will be done here without it first being extensively polled and focus grouped. These ideas aren't simply dreamed up on ConHome and then spat out there to see if it sticks.
There is some political risk in its delivery, and its timing, but also opportunity in how the Opposition may respond, or screw up a response.
In politics, you think, you test, you make the call, and you place your bets where you can.
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
Fine. Boris and Dom have shown the way. This is the new world. Get PR done.
Once proper PR (ie STV which is self-evidently the best all round system, not some AV shit) is in place nobody’s going to reverse it, because as a voting system it’s superior.
There seems to be an assumption, because its associated with the LibDems, that PR will lead to a flood of centrists entering parliament and a nice mushy consensus emerging at Westminster.
In fact, it's far more likely to facilitate the proliferation of populists and extremists, with all the consequences that flow from that. It's a perilous proposal which, in any event, is hardly a priority for many people beyond the self-interested political cadres promoting it.
Sunak's ratings are still better than Truss' and no other Tory leader would be polling much better.
Rather than have yet another pointless leadership election after they removed election winner Boris, the Conservatives should get behind the reduction of inflation and hence interest rates and restoration of economic growth Sunak and Hunt are focused on
There haven't been any Tory poll leads since December 6th, 2021. Seven months BEFORE Boris resigned.
The Labour lead when Boris resigned was half what it is now and when Truss was leader Labour were up to 30% ahead
I wonder when his critics will admit that getting rid of Boris was a catastrophic error. I know people like to look to challenge the obvious, but ousting a charismatic incumbent who is a proven winner (you can add Cameron to Mayor Livingstone & Corbyn) only to see a humongous slide in the VI polls while both replacements personal ratings tank, is a ricket of biblical proportions
The Tories were behind in the polls for SEVEN months BEFORE Boris resigned.
Not as far behind as they are now, and even though he was behind, Boris was whooping Starmer on personality which leads me to believe he could have won back those angry with him. Sunak is tied on personality - the charisma void suits Sir Keir perfectly
Tbh it just seems Sunak is having some sort of insular argument with himself. Blue wall will hate his net zero stuff. Red wall and the north will feel aggrieved by possible HS2 cut. Inheritance tax - effects such a small proportion of us. Guessing it’s the right in the party pulling the strings
Remember: nothing - absolutely nothing - will be done here without it first being extensively polled and focus grouped. These ideas aren't simply dreamed up on ConHome and then spat out there to see if it sticks.
There is some political risk in its delivery, and its timing, but also opportunity in how the Opposition may respond, or screw up a response.
In politics, you think, you test, you make the call, and you place your bets where you can.
Like the last week's chaos?
Besides, it's probably the wrong question.
At some point in the noughties (under Howard?), there was a study showing that Conservative policies were popular, as long as people didn't know they were Conservative policies.
Something similar happened with Corbyn's Labour. The individual policies polled well, but people didn't believe the package added up and didn't trust Team Jezza to deliver them.
Given his personal ratings, I suspect Rishi and the Conservatives have reached the same dismal stage. And the only treatment will be for the public to kick their bottoms into the mid 2030s.
The arrogance of this. We must not be subject to the same laws that apply to everyone else - even where there is evidence that one of us might have committed a crime.
And if we don't get our way we'll refuse to do something which may be necessary to keep safe the people we have pledged to serve.
Tbh it just seems Sunak is having some sort of insular argument with himself. Blue wall will hate his net zero stuff. Red wall and the north will feel aggrieved by possible HS2 cut. Inheritance tax - effects such a small proportion of us. Guessing it’s the right in the party pulling the strings
Remember: nothing - absolutely nothing - will be done here without it first being extensively polled and focus grouped. These ideas aren't simply dreamed up on ConHome and then spat out there to see if it sticks.
There is some political risk in its delivery, and its timing, but also opportunity in how the Opposition may respond, or screw up a response.
In politics, you think, you test, you make the call, and you place your bets where you can.
Like the last week's chaos?
Besides, it's probably the wrong question.
At some point in the noughties (under Howard?), there was a study showing that Conservative policies were popular, as long as people didn't know they were Conservative policies.
Something similar happened with Corbyn's Labour. The individual policies polled well, but people didn't believe the package added up and didn't trust Team Jezza to deliver them.
Given his personal ratings, I suspect Rishi and the Conservatives have reached the same dismal stage. And the only treatment will be for the public to kick their bottoms into the mid 2030s.
It was rather more than that. ISTR the public were asked whether they supported policies XYZ? They did. They were then asked if they supported Conservative Party policy XYZ? The very same people didn't just a moment later. So it wasn't just "if they didn't know". The very act of knowing who proposed a policy made that policy unacceptable. It was more active than passive.
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
The lib dem position on this appears to have evolved from holding a referendum, to simply a manifesto promise, followed by the vote of a coalition parliament. I do hope that's not just because they lost the last referendum on the topic.
Fine. Boris and Dom have shown the way. This is the new world. Get PR done.
Once proper PR (ie STV which is self-evidently the best all round system, not some AV shit) is in place nobody’s going to reverse it, because as a voting system it’s superior.
There seems to be an assumption, because its associated with the LibDems, that PR will lead to a flood of centrists entering parliament and a nice mushy consensus emerging at Westminster.
In fact, it's far more likely to facilitate the proliferation of populists and extremists, with all the consequences that flow from that. It's a perilous proposal which, in any event, is hardly a priority for many people beyond the self-interested political cadres promoting it.
It's almost certain to. If the electoral and party system were PR now, it's doubtful that Keir Starmer would be cruising into government. We'd have an AfD style party and a Corbynite left party representing serious blocs.
Apparently the kicking side of rugby is crap and not important.
It's crap but exceptionally important.
Would people be calling SA crap if they had kicked those 11 points and win?
No. But the importance of goalkicking makes the game tedious to the uninitiated. Rugby Union fans are raving about this game. I'm finding it dull. I just don't get excited by two minutes to set a dominant scrum, winning a penalty, then kicking a goal. It's 5 minutes of my life I could have back. This, incidentally, is why, contrary to the continual insistence of Union fans since 1995, rugby league has shown no signs of dying out.
Edit. See also the thrilling rolling maul... Pass the bloody ball!!!!
Dog owners need to be held responsible for attacks by their dogs in exactly the same way as they would be if they had personally attacked someone themselves.
They are already responsible, under the Dangerous Dogs Act Section 3. Though I am not sure if I would extend this to putting the owner down. And "be *held* responsible" is perhaps the issue.
(1)If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1 any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—
(a)the owner; and (b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
I was suddenly reminded of Martin Amis's Lionel Asbo.
"Lionel Asbo is a "brutally generic" yob. He looks a bit like Wayne Rooney: "the slab-like body, the full lump of the face, the tight-shaved crown with its tawny stubble"." (guardian)
"Who let the dogs in? …This, we fear, is going to be the question. Who let the dogs in?
Apparently the kicking side of rugby is crap and not important.
It's crap but exceptionally important.
Would people be calling SA crap if they had kicked those 11 points and win?
No. But the importance of goalkicking makes the game tedious to the uninitiated. Rugby Union fans are raving about this game. I'm finding it dull. I just don't get excited by two minutes to set a dominant scrum, winning a penalty, then kicking a goal. It's 5 minutes of my life I could have back. This, incidentally, is why, contrary to the continual insistence of Union fans since 1995, rugby league has shown no signs of dying out.
Perhaps not dying out, but it’s hardly expanding. The league World Cup is even more restricted that the Union one.
The arrogance of this. We must not be subject to the same laws that apply to everyone else - even where there is evidence that one of us might have committed a crime.
And if we don't get our way we'll refuse to do something which may be necessary to keep safe the people we have pledged to serve.
A few years back I was at a barbecue. A recently retired police officer, in a discussion, rather proudly said that if a firearms officer was ever charged, they’d all turn in their tickets.
He was shocked at the response from his audience - most went for “sack them without their pensions”. A couple suggested prosecution.
It was quite interesting - no sympathy from traditional law and order types. The kind of people who would have been on the police side in any case, a few years back.
Dog owners need to be held responsible for attacks by their dogs in exactly the same way as they would be if they had personally attacked someone themselves.
They are already responsible, under the Dangerous Dogs Act Section 3. Though I am not sure if I would extend this to putting the owner down. And "be *held* responsible" is perhaps the issue.
(1)If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1 any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—
(a)the owner; and (b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
I was suddenly reminded of Martin Amis's Lionel Asbo.
"Lionel Asbo is a "brutally generic" yob. He looks a bit like Wayne Rooney: "the slab-like body, the full lump of the face, the tight-shaved crown with its tawny stubble"." (guardian)
"Who let the dogs in? …This, we fear, is going to be the question. Who let the dogs in?
Dog owners need to be held responsible for attacks by their dogs in exactly the same way as they would be if they had personally attacked someone themselves.
They are already responsible, under the Dangerous Dogs Act Section 3. Though I am not sure if I would extend this to putting the owner down. And "be *held* responsible" is perhaps the issue.
(1)If a dog is dangerously out of control in [F1 any place [F2in England or Wales] (whether or not a public place)])—
(a)the owner; and (b)if different, the person for the time being in charge of the dog, is guilty of an offence, or, if the dog while so out of control injures any person [F3or assistance dog], an aggravated offence, under this subsection.
I was suddenly reminded of Martin Amis's Lionel Asbo.
"Lionel Asbo is a "brutally generic" yob. He looks a bit like Wayne Rooney: "the slab-like body, the full lump of the face, the tight-shaved crown with its tawny stubble"." (guardian)
"Who let the dogs in? …This, we fear, is going to be the question. Who let the dogs in?
Comments
But... government needs to meet half way over costs. Because they are not mandating owner-occupiers to do all this remedial work in their own homes so it seems a little unfair to say 'only landlords must do this'.
In our family's listed small manor house (4 bed, 5000 sqft) we had a lot of original Georgian sash windows with some original glass.
For the windows that did not have to be replaced due to rottenness (place was empty for years when they bought it), we had a local glazier (local man who worked out of a shed) supply toughened panes of glass slightly smaller than the inside window opening, with polished edges. We then held these against the frame with a foam bead the frame side to cut draughts, and mirror hinges.
Depending on the window, we would either remove them in summer or leave them up all year round. With a remove and clean the inside-side every year or two.
Very unobtrusive, and they worked very well for the 20+ years we had them.
The way to do it is to do one, or one room, and see if it is effective. I'm sure you know that for sound insulation a wide air gap, but narrow enough to minimise convection currents, is key.
Hope you find your answer.
I do not support vandalism but this is real and needs to be addresed
(3)For the purposes of this Act a dog shall be regarded as dangerously out of control on any occasion on which there are grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will injure any person[F2 or assistance dog ], whether or not it actually does so, but references to a dog injuring a person[F3 or assistance dog ] or there being grounds for reasonable apprehension that it will do so do not include references to any case in which the dog is being used for a lawful purpose by a constable or a person in the service of the Crown.
Which is much broader than I would have expected. I can see why people use the Dangerous Dogs Act as an example of poor legislation - sweeping powers with no clear direction on who's responsible for enforcing them.
It's interesting that, for all Sunak's recent bandwagon-jumping, he has completely failed to announce any additional funding for local authority dog wardens.
It wasn’t until Channel 4 launched that it gained a regular berth on a UK network (which is what everybody always cites as the ‘start’ of NFL coverage here).
Ironically, it was World of Sport covering ‘marginal’ sports (including Kabaddi) that convinced ministers to insist that Channel 4 should show sports that were not shown on mainstream channels.
Startled by the fact that the organisers have banned Fido and Rover from a march to argue how cuddlesome aforesaid dogs are.
Wolsey > More > Audley > Wriothsley
The default speed limit is the only one that does not need any signs ! Hmmm - except at the edge of town?
20mph is the new default speed limit, so if you are driving on a residential road with no speed signage, you must assume that the limit is 20mph
https://www.thecarexpert.co.uk/the-wales-20mph-speed-limit/
However, in a second U-turn, he later told the BBC that XL Bullies under six-months-old would be free to be walked at the protest after all.
https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/police-aware-planned-mass-xl-27775093
LOL. The puppies are safe not sure about the adults!
Only that the number of people angry enough about this to go out with spray paint is greater than zero.
See also: people vandalising ULEZ cameras.
We don't get much political graffiti in the UK. Probably for the best. But when I was in Spain, there was loads. Mostly by miniscule parties nobody had head of. Graffiti and vandalism tell us nothing about What The People Think.
“And little and dark, more like monkey than man”
They are displayed whenever the speed drops from 30 or even 40 and are the new 20mph zones not previous ones
And let me reiterate, i do not support any vandalism and the way this must be resolved is through the Senedd and LAs addressing local concerns and any suggestions otherwise is unacceptable
Now can we talk about something less controversial? Like the effect of listening to Radiohead while eating a pineapple pizza on people's views on Brexit?
Oh wait. Isn't this the "death tax" that the tories and daily mail destroyed towards the end of iirc Brown's premiership???
I do agree about the importance of encouraging owner-occupiers to keep up. I guess the main point of leverage there will be from mortgage providers who will want to know that the property can be rented out if the buyer's circumstances change.
From the graph that @MattW posted earlier in the thread, it does look like owner-occupiers have tracked quite closely to private landlords so far: both have risen by about 20 points (two rating bands) since the beginning of the century.
https://news.sky.com/story/amp/met-police-firearms-officers-turning-in-their-weapons-following-chris-kaba-murder-charge-12968296
In a leaked message from the party’s WhatsApp group, Rona Mackay warns colleagues to make the “crucial by-election” their “top priority” after lamenting the failure of MSPs to turn up to campaign.
The SNP is operating a rota that allows MSPs to miss Holyrood sessions to electioneer in Rutherglen & Hamilton West, the former seat of Margaret Ferrier, who was ousted via a recall petition after breach of Covid rules.
Despite a recent upturn in support for the SNP in a Times YouGov poll, the bookmakers have Labour candidate Michael Shanks as the strong odds-on favourite, with the SNP’s Katy Loudon at 8-1 and the Conservative candidate, Thomas Kerr, at 50-1.
In Mackay’s message, posted on Friday and leaked to The Sunday Times, she rebuked the entire Scottish parliament group after only a handful turned up to Rutherglen.
“Folks, as you know I’m slipping two groups every parliamentary day to go to Rutherglen,” she wrote. “On Wednesday, there were two MSPs there, myself and a minister. I understand three members were there yesterday. Please be clear you are only being slipped for the by-election . . . We’re less than two weeks away from this crucial by-election. Please make it your top priority.”
With less than a fortnight until polling, one veteran SNP MP has described the ground campaign in Rutherglen as “the worst-supported in any by-election by ordinary activists in living memory, with mainly MPs, MSPs, councillors and party staffers doing the legwork”.
A SNP spokesman said that members from across Scotland were uniting to lead a “positive campaign” to elect Loudon as the “real alternative to Westminster’s cost of living crisis”.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/rutherglen-by-election-snp-chief-whip-rebukes-msps-for-going-awol-during-campaign-s3hwg3gs9
I consider the vandalism to be counter productive and there is a genuine case for a revision to some roads whilst retaining the legislation
I have already stated I do not support the conservative party on this and just want common sense to break out
I'd be interested in the dot and tittle on that one, since a painted out sign at the start of a "default" zone makes it ambiguous for some distance.
The speed limit won't be the same as before the start of the default zone (lamp posts, no repeater signs), since aiui a non-default speed limit requires repeater signs showing the non-default speed limit at an interval of iirc a maximum 400m.
So I'd say that 400m inside a default speed-limit zone with a painted out sign, it is clear that the default limit applies because of the lack of repeater signs saying something else.
They *could*, but won't, do it like STOP and GIVEWAY signs and give the 20mph sign a unique shape such that it can be understood when obscured.
If so, why?
What a pile of shite.
Cromwell tried to introduce them in 1536 with the Laws in Wales Acts but even that was buggered when Henry gave Haverfordwest its own MP. And since then - nothing.
There may be interesting differences in aggravating and mitigating factors I expect, but I don't think updated sentencing guidelines for CDDD are published yet.
Not fantastic.
Box office $1.419 billion
Well, someone certainly likes it...
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-66902886
"Coogan and Vorderman back Liberal Democrats' electoral reform pledge
Actor Steve Coogan and presenter Carol Vorderman have backed Liberal Democrat pledges to reform how the UK's general elections are run.
The Lib Dems have long called for first past the post (FPTP) to be replaced with proportional representation (PR).
Vorderman said the current system fails to deliver parliaments that "properly reflect the will of the nation".
Coogan also backed the Lib Dems' campaign, and said "millions of people's voices go unheard".
Their pre-recorded video messages were screened at a party rally in Bournemouth."
Son asks to stay and told he needs to apply via the normal process for minor royals
Not seeing anything wrong. Just a bureaucracy related to a big organisation
In an entirely non-attention-seeking way.
A lot in that.
1 - That LLs have actually caught up. The previous big change was The Housing Act 2005, which introduced all kinds of things like LL licensing and the HHSRS (Housing Health and Safety Rating System).
The HHSRS is a HUGE massively comprehensive Brobdingnagian thing - several hundred pages, and council staff are expected to administer it with minimal training, so it can go badly wrong very easily.
2 - That the OO sector is in 2 strata:
a) 2-2.5 million newbuilds over the recent 15 year period that have high ratings, which are usually not sold to landlords by developer decision and are well ahead of the PRS average, flattering the OO sector average. Similar but smaller differences apply to newbuilds since perhaps 1995 or 2000.
b) Older stock in the OO sector which are unregulated and have therefore fallen behind the PRS. These are the biggest energy drag, as there are far more of them than poor PRS stock.
One structural reason for b) is that it is now an offence to rent out EPC F properties so these have all been renovated, have exited the PRS to the OO sector, or are being rented out illegally.
(Unless the stupid bugger is going to reverse that as well)
EXCL - Fears are growing inside Downing Street for the health of beloved chief mouser Larry the cat
No10 officials drawing up emergency PR plan on how to break the news to the nation when the ailing moggy does pass away
https://twitter.com/kateferguson4/status/1705664856660021551
https://x.com/patrickkmaguire/status/1705639430910885927?s=20
"'Torture sentences' that consign some of Britain's most wronged prisoners to decades behind bars"
https://www.itv.com/news/2023-09-22/torture-sentences-trap-britains-most-wronged-inmates-behind-bars-for-decades
@MattChorley
The last time we went round the block on abolishing inheritance tax (July) we asked YouGov to poll it.
Is the priority of just 10% of people, and 16% of Tory voters
As for the politics, I’m pretty confident that of all the things Team Starmer might struggle to land, I think they’ll be ok with “millionaire’s tax cut”
@sundersays
Abolishing inheritance tax outright would be worth up to £290 million to Rishi Sunak's own children - given his wealth of £730 million, and a tax levied at 40% after the first £1 million.
Once proper PR (ie STV which is self-evidently the best all round system, not some AV shit) is in place nobody’s going to reverse it, because as a voting system it’s superior.
"We will continue to support the First
Past the Post system of voting, as it
allows voters to kick out politicians
who don’t deliver, both locally and
nationally."
so not explicit in their intentions
But yes, voter ID is the bigun.
We used to see the same, regularly, on here about the Mori index to frame that "no-one cares about Europe" (TM) before the referendum.
I wrote this in July about why cutting inheritance tax is a bad idea.
https://x.com/DavidGauke/status/1705643633020399742?s=20
But there is a perception that the government is frantically running round looking for spending to cut.
And there is a perception that a lot of schools and hospitals are about to fall down
Doesn't matter how accurate those perceptions are. They're what the public think.
It's at least possible that a very wealthy and not particularly liked PM running with a tax cut that benefits wealthy people and does naff all for incentives to work...
... might be as popular as a bucket of cold sick at an "all you can eat" buffet.
There is some political risk in its delivery, and its timing, but also opportunity in how the Opposition may respond, or screw up a response.
In politics, you think, you test, you make the call, and you place your bets where you can.
In fact, it's far more likely to facilitate the proliferation of populists and extremists, with all the consequences that flow from that. It's a perilous proposal which, in any event, is hardly a priority for many people beyond the self-interested political cadres promoting it.
At some point in the noughties (under Howard?), there was a study showing that Conservative policies were popular, as long as people didn't know they were Conservative policies.
Something similar happened with Corbyn's Labour. The individual policies polled well, but people didn't believe the package added up and didn't trust Team Jezza to deliver them.
Given his personal ratings, I suspect Rishi and the Conservatives have reached the same dismal stage. And the only treatment will be for the public to kick their bottoms into the mid 2030s.
And if we don't get our way we'll refuse to do something which may be necessary to keep safe the people we have pledged to serve.
ISTR the public were asked whether they supported policies XYZ?
They did.
They were then asked if they supported Conservative Party policy XYZ?
The very same people didn't just a moment later.
So it wasn't just "if they didn't know".
The very act of knowing who proposed a policy made that policy unacceptable.
It was more active than passive.
Rugby Union fans are raving about this game.
I'm finding it dull.
I just don't get excited by two minutes to set a dominant scrum, winning a penalty, then kicking a goal.
It's 5 minutes of my life I could have back.
This, incidentally, is why, contrary to the continual insistence of Union fans since 1995, rugby league has shown no signs of dying out.
Edit.
See also the thrilling rolling maul...
Pass the bloody ball!!!!
He was shocked at the response from his audience - most went for “sack them without their pensions”. A couple suggested prosecution.
It was quite interesting - no sympathy from traditional law and order types. The kind of people who would have been on the police side in any case, a few years back.