Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

LAB lead drops to just 10% in latest Opinium poll – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,725
edited October 2023 in General
imageLAB lead drops to just 10% in latest Opinium poll – politicalbetting.com

Read the full story here

«1345

Comments

  • Options
    fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,279
    First.
  • Options
    This is probably about where we'll end up.
  • Options
    Opinium = outlier!
  • Options

    This is probably about where we'll end up.

    Agree- that's what the Opinium methodology is trying to do, and they're good at this.

    The important thing is that "10 points behind + swingback to come = game on" doesn't work. To a decent approximation, the swingback is already there.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,034
    Maybe Sunak is planning on getting today's VAR team to count the votes.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    That 7% Reform vote won't be anything like that come election day.

    Mostly not going to Keir "second referendum" Starmer.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,958

    That 7% Reform vote won't be anything like that come election day.

    Mostly not going to Keir "second referendum" Starmer.

    Nor will the Greens get 7%. At a guess id say Ref will be 3% with most of those remaining votes going to abstention or Tory, and Green will be 3% with the gap split between abstention, Lib Dem and Lab.
  • Options
    carnforthcarnforth Posts: 3,264
    TimS said:

    That 7% Reform vote won't be anything like that come election day.

    Mostly not going to Keir "second referendum" Starmer.

    Nor will the Greens get 7%. At a guess id say Ref will be 3% with most of those remaining votes going to abstention or Tory, and Green will be 3% with the gap split between abstention, Lib Dem and Lab.
    Who will Corbyn supporters and their ilk vote for? If they are a significant proportion of the Green vote, it may stick.

    There is another difference: there will be Green candidates in many more constiuencies than Reform candidates (I assume).
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,157
    edited September 2023
    O/T

    Watching Match of the Day, looks like another very bad day for VAR.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66973987
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,138
    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia
  • Options
    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
  • Options
    carnforthcarnforth Posts: 3,264
    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
  • Options
    bigglesbiggles Posts: 4,370
    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The market price suggests to me that there won’t be a major issue.
  • Options
    carnforth said:

    TimS said:

    That 7% Reform vote won't be anything like that come election day.

    Mostly not going to Keir "second referendum" Starmer.

    Nor will the Greens get 7%. At a guess id say Ref will be 3% with most of those remaining votes going to abstention or Tory, and Green will be 3% with the gap split between abstention, Lib Dem and Lab.
    Who will Corbyn supporters and their ilk vote for? If they are a significant proportion of the Green vote, it may stick.

    There is another difference: there will be Green candidates in many more constiuencies than Reform candidates (I assume).
    I'm not so sure.

    It's not that difficult to stand lots of candidates- Natural Law managed 310 in 1992, and James Goldsmith 547 in 1997.

    They will pretty much all be paper candidates, but unless they want to stand down, there's little intrinsic barrier to RefUK putting up a full slate. (After all, the Brexit party ended up choosing not to stand in Conservative 2017 seats.) The deposits would be pocket change for their leadership.
  • Options
    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
    Its remarkable how last year people were hysterically saying we had no storage, then we exported our surplus through the winter, now the same people are saying the same thing again.

    Our media never learns.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,958
    carnforth said:

    TimS said:

    That 7% Reform vote won't be anything like that come election day.

    Mostly not going to Keir "second referendum" Starmer.

    Nor will the Greens get 7%. At a guess id say Ref will be 3% with most of those remaining votes going to abstention or Tory, and Green will be 3% with the gap split between abstention, Lib Dem and Lab.
    Who will Corbyn supporters and their ilk vote for? If they are a significant proportion of the Green vote, it may stick.

    There is another difference: there will be Green candidates in many more constiuencies than Reform candidates (I assume).
    I don’t think either of them is real current voting intention. I think this is an artefact, across multiple pollsters, of over sampling politically engaged people. So my expectation is that the “real” level is closer to 4-5% for both, which some pollsters show.

    There will be Corbynites voting Green certainly, and there will be Faragistes and grumpy types who may flirt with the idea of Ref too. But not 7% each.

    Still, the LLG vs RefCon shares are more stable than Con vs Lab. In this latest Opinium it’s 58:36. The higher ones recently have been 62-63 plays 33-36. Pretty consistent with the difference you expect from Opinium’s swingback methodology,
  • Options

    Impressive. Who would have guessed the return of the cones hotline?

    I posted earlier about the fall in ev sales and the Guardians piece on ev insurance premiums

    As an ev owner do you agree with me that owing an ev is for the wealthy or fleet buyer ?

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/sep/30/the-quotes-were-5000-or-more-electric-vehicle-owners-face-soaring-insurance-costs
    I don't agree. My Tesla insurance went up nearly 60% - which is a lot. Then again the zero road tax vs the £480 a year I paid for my previous two cars helps cover that.

    Car insurance is shooting up for most drivers of most cars. It is worse for EVs - that is true. But the suggestion that it is *only* for EVs isn't true.
    £480 - wow that was a lot. Got an email earlier this week saying my road tax is direct debit is coming out next week, £240 for the year.

    My insurance is also due for renewal soon. Seems from shopping around that the insurance premium on EVs currently significantly exceeds that.

    Its a shame, considering that road tax is going to be applied to EVs before long, hopefully the insurance premium on EVs comes down soon.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    Andy_JS said:

    O/T

    Watching Match of the Day, looks like another very bad day for VAR.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/66973987

    At the end of the season, it might impact places in Europe.

    So an extremely bad day.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 19,170
    edited September 2023
    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    [deleted. A bit ranty and sweary]
  • Options
    FlatlanderFlatlander Posts: 3,959

    Impressive. Who would have guessed the return of the cones hotline?

    I posted earlier about the fall in ev sales and the Guardians piece on ev insurance premiums

    As an ev owner do you agree with me that owing an ev is for the wealthy or fleet buyer ?

    https://www.theguardian.com/money/2023/sep/30/the-quotes-were-5000-or-more-electric-vehicle-owners-face-soaring-insurance-costs
    I don't agree. My Tesla insurance went up nearly 60% - which is a lot. Then again the zero road tax vs the £480 a year I paid for my previous two cars helps cover that.

    Car insurance is shooting up for most drivers of most cars. It is worse for EVs - that is true. But the suggestion that it is *only* for EVs isn't true.
    £480 - wow that was a lot. Got an email earlier this week saying my road tax is direct debit is coming out next week, £240 for the year.

    My insurance is also due for renewal soon. Seems from shopping around that the insurance premium on EVs currently significantly exceeds that.

    Its a shame, considering that road tax is going to be applied to EVs before long, hopefully the insurance premium on EVs comes down soon.
    My dirty diesel (well, not really, it does pass the ULEZ test at least) has zero road tax. I wonder how long that's going to last?
  • Options
    ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 2,993
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,924
    On Topic

    SKS Party on less than Corbyn 2017

    SKS Tory Fans please Explain
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,958
    Slovakia, 12.05% counted

    Smer-S&D: 26%
    Hlas-S&D: 18% (-1)
    PS-RE: 10% (+1)
    OĽaNO+-EPP|ECR: 9% (+1)
    KDH-EPP: 7%
    SNS→ECR: 6%
    Aliancia-EPP: 6% (-2)
    Republika-NI: 5% (-1)
    SaS-ECR: 4% (+1)
    SR-ID: 3%
    ...
    +/- vs. 3% counted

    #Slovakia #Voľby2023

    ➤ europeelects.eu/slovakia

    https://x.com/europeelects/status/1708241761158430769?s=46

    But caveat that it’s early and those are largely rural votes. The exit polls had Progressives (PS-RE above) winning narrowly.
  • Options
    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    Good idea. We should do whatever it takes to support Ukraine, no reason our troops shouldn't be operating in their land to help them with training or logistics or anything else.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,138

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
    Its remarkable how last year people were hysterically saying we had no storage, then we exported our surplus through the winter, now the same people are saying the same thing again.

    Our media never learns.
    You didn't actually read the article, did you ?

    ...European governments expect the seaborne gas to keep coming. Currently, Spain, the UK and France have the highest number of terminals for processing imported LNG, collectively making up 60% of the continent’s capacity. But, according to S&P Global’s Atlas of Energy Transition, other European countries are planning to develop new capacity as they look for alternatives to Russian gas...

    The point about the UK is that it hasn't the capacity to build up a reserve over the summer months, bought cheaply.
    So it is, to a somewhat greater extent, subject to any spikes in market prices over the winter.

    ...In late September, the gas transmission operator, National Gas, said it was “unlikely” that gas supplies would be at risk this winter unless “a very cold winter … should coincide with a major interruption to one of our gas supply sources”. But the risk of this happening should not be discounted, the operator said...

    We'll probably get away with it, but the article seems a fairly balanced analysis to me.
  • Options
    FishingFishing Posts: 4,563
    edited September 2023

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    Farm and other subsidies. Northern Ireland. Foreign aid. Green crap. Diversity BS. Non-palliative care for the over-90s.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,087
    biggles said:


    It’s just possible that the actual proposals, half leaked/briefed to the Telegraph, and thought up by the actual experts, are complex, sensible, and well thought through.

    No, it's not possible.
  • Options
    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    What the fuck? Since when did the British Defence Sec urge British defence firms to relocate production overseas? What possible reason could there be for doing this? God he's a twat.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,090
    edited September 2023
    TimS said:

    That 7% Reform vote won't be anything like that come election day.

    Mostly not going to Keir "second referendum" Starmer.

    Nor will the Greens get 7%. At a guess id say Ref will be 3% with most of those remaining votes going to abstention or Tory, and Green will be 3% with the gap split between abstention, Lib Dem and Lab.
    It would be an interesting match bet, Green vs Reform % at the next GE. I agree with @carnforth , the Corbynites might well go Green, and they’re probably better organised & more professional than Reform.

    I’d have Greens favourite, 1/2 vs 6/4 maybe? I wonder if any bookie will offer it

    If Farage became Reform leader that would change things I guess
  • Options
    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
    Erm. Kind of missing the point. If we had more storage we would have been storing through the summer so we wouldn't have to rely so much on LNG supplies from elsewhere.
  • Options
    bigglesbiggles Posts: 4,370
    edited September 2023
    Dura_Ace said:

    biggles said:


    It’s just possible that the actual proposals, half leaked/briefed to the Telegraph, and thought up by the actual experts, are complex, sensible, and well thought through.

    No, it's not possible.
    As has been shown on here repeatedly, the subjects about which you have something to add are motor cars, Eastern European geography, and tactical level military ops. On the strategic you’re as clueless as Lewis Page, and that’s going some.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,228
    edited September 2023
    Labour now polling no better under Starmer than Corbyn did in 2017 if Opinium is correct, the LDs on 10% also slightly down on 2019 as are the SNP on 3%.

    However the Tories polling worse still than they did in 1997 with RefUK on 7% and the Greens on 7% the main beneficiaries
  • Options
    bigglesbiggles Posts: 4,370
    edited September 2023
    isam said:

    TimS said:

    That 7% Reform vote won't be anything like that come election day.

    Mostly not going to Keir "second referendum" Starmer.

    Nor will the Greens get 7%. At a guess id say Ref will be 3% with most of those remaining votes going to abstention or Tory, and Green will be 3% with the gap split between abstention, Lib Dem and Lab.
    It would be an interesting match bet, Green vs Reform % at the next GE. I agree with @carnforth , the Corbynites might well go Green, and they’re probably better organised & more professional than Reform.

    I’d have Greens favourite, 1/2 vs 6/4 maybe? I wonder if any bookie will offer it

    If Farage became Reform leader that would change things I guess
    I think you have to be right. The Greens are seen by many as, at worse, harmless, and they can always get the NIMBY vote. I’d double their chances.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,228
    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    To train not for combat
  • Options
    bigglesbiggles Posts: 4,370

    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    What the fuck? Since when did the British Defence Sec urge British defence firms to relocate production overseas? What possible reason could there be for doing this? God he's a twat.
    Erm…. since always… If BAE is to compete internationally it need a global footprint. That’s why it owns so much capacity in the US, has an interest in other European countries, and joint ventures in countries it can’t directly operate in. See also Rolls, Babcock, etc.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,090
    biggles said:

    isam said:

    TimS said:

    That 7% Reform vote won't be anything like that come election day.

    Mostly not going to Keir "second referendum" Starmer.

    Nor will the Greens get 7%. At a guess id say Ref will be 3% with most of those remaining votes going to abstention or Tory, and Green will be 3% with the gap split between abstention, Lib Dem and Lab.
    It would be an interesting match bet, Green vs Reform % at the next GE. I agree with @carnforth , the Corbynites might well go Green, and they’re probably better organised & more professional than Reform.

    I’d have Greens favourite, 1/2 vs 6/4 maybe? I wonder if any bookie will offer it

    If Farage became Reform leader that would change things I guess
    I think you have to be right. The Greens are seen by many as, at worse, harmless, and they can always get the NIMBY vote. I’d double their chances.
    Yes, perhaps 1/2 isn’t strong enough.
  • Options

    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    What the fuck? Since when did the British Defence Sec urge British defence firms to relocate production overseas? What possible reason could there be for doing this? God he's a twat.
    Since about 316 years ago.

    British firms having presences abroad is absolutely in our interest.
  • Options
    Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 27,157
    edited September 2023

    Good news - America has avoided a government shut down.

    Bad news - Its only been achieved by conceding to Republican demands of stripping Ukraine of any new aid.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66973976

    For shame.

    Also the Democrats are temporarily dependent on Joe Manchin for a majority in the Senate.

    "He is known for working with Republicans on issues such as abortion, immigration, energy policy, and gun control."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Manchin
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,228

    HYUFD said:

    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    To train not for combat
    The US troops Kennedy sent into VIetnam were only for 'training and advice'. The actual distinction is not as clear as you might like to believe.
    It is, because if we sent actual combat troops and fighter jets to Ukraine we would be effectively at war with a nuclear weapons armed Russia. That is a wholly different situation to the Vietnam war as Vietnam had no nuclear weapons
  • Options
    I see Tory No 10 strategists think attacking Sir Elton John is the way forward.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,228
    Andy_JS said:

    Good news - America has avoided a government shut down.

    Bad news - Its only been achieved by conceding to Republican demands of stripping Ukraine of any new aid.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66973976

    For shame.

    Also the Democrats are temporarily dependent on Joe Manchin for a majority in the Senate.

    "He is known for working with Republicans on issues such as abortion, immigration, energy policy, and gun control."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Manchin
    Yes, Manchin is probably the closest Senator to the median US voter
  • Options
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    To train not for combat
    The US troops Kennedy sent into VIetnam were only for 'training and advice'. The actual distinction is not as clear as you might like to believe.
    It is, because if we sent actual combat troops and fighter jets to Ukraine we would be effectively at war with a nuclear weapons armed Russia. That is a wholly different situation to the Vietnam war as Vietnam had no nuclear weapons
    Russia can always withdraw from Ukraine if it doesn't want a conflict, there's no reason for nuclear weapons to be involved.
  • Options

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    To train not for combat
    The US troops Kennedy sent into VIetnam were only for 'training and advice'. The actual distinction is not as clear as you might like to believe.
    It is, because if we sent actual combat troops and fighter jets to Ukraine we would be effectively at war with a nuclear weapons armed Russia. That is a wholly different situation to the Vietnam war as Vietnam had no nuclear weapons
    Russia can always withdraw from Ukraine if it doesn't want a conflict, there's no reason for nuclear weapons to be involved.
    Japan would have probably said the same in WW2....
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,811
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    To train not for combat
    The US troops Kennedy sent into VIetnam were only for 'training and advice'. The actual distinction is not as clear as you might like to believe.
    It is, because if we sent actual combat troops and fighter jets to Ukraine we would be effectively at war with a nuclear weapons armed Russia. That is a wholly different situation to the Vietnam war as Vietnam had no nuclear weapons
    Fun story - the Americans had given South Vietnam a TRIGA rector.

    The funky bit about TRIGA is the core is weapons grade uranium. The even funkier but is that there is enough there for a bomb. The cherry on top is that building a bomb from enriched uranium is extremely easy.

    So when North Vietnam went south, there was a comic moment or two until they retrieved the reactor core.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,138

    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    What the fuck? Since when did the British Defence Sec urge British defence firms to relocate production overseas? What possible reason could there be for doing this? God he's a twat.
    Not relocating; setting up.
    ie new factories, as they do all the time, and as they've already been discussing.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,138

    HYUFD said:

    ohnotnow said:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2023/09/30/grant-shapps-to-send-uk-troops-to-ukraine/

    "British troops will be deployed in Ukraine for the first time under plans being discussed with military chiefs, the new Defence Secretary has disclosed.

    In an interview with The Telegraph, Grant Shapps said that he had held talks with Army leaders about shifting an official British-led training programme “into Ukraine” rather than relying on UK and other Nato members’ bases. He also called on more British defence firms to set up factories in Ukraine. "

    To train not for combat
    The US troops Kennedy sent into VIetnam were only for 'training and advice'. The actual distinction is not as clear as you might like to believe.
    In this case, the distinction is much clearer. We have neither the intention or the capacity to intervene as the US did.

    Vietnam, FWIW, was a much different situation than Ukraine.
    Intervention there started under Truman Eisenhower, who both massively subsidised the French effort to re-establish it as a colony after WWII. Eisenhower wanted to send troops in 1954, but Congress refused.

    The Kennedy administration intervention, urged on him by the military and the hawks in the administration, was always intended to go beyond a pure training role.
    (Though it's quite likely that he'd have pulled out had he survived to win a second term.)

  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 63,138
    Andy_JS said:

    Good news - America has avoided a government shut down.

    Bad news - Its only been achieved by conceding to Republican demands of stripping Ukraine of any new aid.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66973976

    For shame.

    Also the Democrats are temporarily dependent on Joe Manchin for a majority in the Senate.

    "He is known for working with Republicans on issues such as abortion, immigration, energy policy, and gun control."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Manchin
    The stripping of Ukraine aid from the bill has nothing to do with the Senate, which was quite prepared to vote for it. And had indeed done so in a bill originating in the Senate, which the GOP majority House rejected.

    It was entirely because of the GOP in the House of Representatives, where the fight over the 'debt limit' - a constitutionally dubious concept - originated.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    Nigelb said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Good news - America has avoided a government shut down.

    Bad news - Its only been achieved by conceding to Republican demands of stripping Ukraine of any new aid.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66973976

    For shame.

    Also the Democrats are temporarily dependent on Joe Manchin for a majority in the Senate.

    "He is known for working with Republicans on issues such as abortion, immigration, energy policy, and gun control."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Manchin
    The stripping of Ukraine aid from the bill has nothing to do with the Senate, which was quite prepared to vote for it. And had indeed done so in a bill originating in the Senate, which the GOP majority House rejected.

    It was entirely because of the GOP in the House of Representatives, where the fight over the 'debt limit' - a constitutionally dubious concept - originated.
    For the nut job wing of the Republicans, every dollar sent to Ukraine is a dollar that could be used for corporate welfare, and reducing the tax bills of the wealthiest 0.5% of the population.
  • Options
    EabhalEabhal Posts: 6,034

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    How many of the 1.7 million are involved in planning?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,560
    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    How many of the 1.7 million are involved in planning?
    Not in planning but none of the 11,000 civil servants employed by the DfE, Ofsted and Ofqual are involved in education.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,150
    The trouble with Opinium's methodology, if I understand correctly, is that it assumes those expressing support for the Tories are as likely to turn out as they have been in previous elections. Is that really likely to be true, when comparing the next election with Johnson's "Get Brexit Done" election?

  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,811
    ydoethur said:

    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    How many of the 1.7 million are involved in planning?
    Not in planning but none of the 11,000 civil servants employed by the DfE, Ofsted and Ofqual are involved in education.
    Not true.

    They are educating us in what not to do in education.


    Not on a single issue, or in one direction or twain,
    But conclusively, comprehensively, and several times and again,
    Were all our most holy illusions knocked higher than Gilderoy’s kite.
    We have had a jolly good lesson, and it serves us jolly well right!
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,560

    ydoethur said:

    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    How many of the 1.7 million are involved in planning?
    Not in planning but none of the 11,000 civil servants employed by the DfE, Ofsted and Ofqual are involved in education.
    Not true.

    They are educating us in what not to do in education.


    Not on a single issue, or in one direction or twain,
    But conclusively, comprehensively, and several times and again,
    Were all our most holy illusions knocked higher than Gilderoy’s kite.
    We have had a jolly good lesson, and it serves us jolly well right!
    They can continue to do that in their own time for free as that numpty Sam Freedman does.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,560

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Good news - America has avoided a government shut down.

    Bad news - Its only been achieved by conceding to Republican demands of stripping Ukraine of any new aid.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66973976

    For shame.

    Also the Democrats are temporarily dependent on Joe Manchin for a majority in the Senate.

    "He is known for working with Republicans on issues such as abortion, immigration, energy policy, and gun control."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Manchin
    The stripping of Ukraine aid from the bill has nothing to do with the Senate, which was quite prepared to vote for it. And had indeed done so in a bill originating in the Senate, which the GOP majority House rejected.

    It was entirely because of the GOP in the House of Representatives, where the fight over the 'debt limit' - a constitutionally dubious concept - originated.
    For the nut job wing of the Republicans, every dollar sent to Ukraine is a dollar that could be used for corporate welfare, and reducing the tax bills of the wealthiest 0.5% of the population.
    I'm very negative about the future of the world this morning. Tiny wedge issues are being used to drive massive gaps into western liberalism, and the winners will be tyrants and dictators.

    Even this country is not immune: we came near to a Corbyn government, and we know what position he would have taken on issues such as Ukraine. The "It's our fault!" approach to defeating fascism.
    Some absolute genius on here (not me!) said that Corbyn wouldn’t send troops to Latvia if Russia invaded because ‘the Russians could probably manage by themselves.’

    Turns out the poster in question might have been wrong, but it was still a brilliant skewering.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,993
    Chris said:

    The trouble with Opinium's methodology, if I understand correctly, is that it assumes those expressing support for the Tories are as likely to turn out as they have been in previous elections. Is that really likely to be true, when comparing the next election with Johnson's "Get Brexit Done" election?

    Looking at the header it is a major discrepancy with the 20 point leads in Yougov and We Think. Presumably due to methodology, but possibly just random sampling error in one or all the polls.

    Unless confirmed in other polling after conference season is over,, I wouldn't take it too seriously.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,560
    edited October 2023
    Good heavens above.

    The BBC has finally written a report with some actual, useful information on the energy price cap:

    Specifically, the price of gas is 6.89p per kilowatt hour (kWh), and electricity is 27.35p per kWh.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,730
    Impossibly sexy and petite Chinese girls in really tight wet suits staring contemplatively at the seaplane
  • Options
    Chris said:

    The trouble with Opinium's methodology, if I understand correctly, is that it assumes those expressing support for the Tories are as likely to turn out as they have been in previous elections. Is that really likely to be true, when comparing the next election with Johnson's "Get Brexit Done" election?

    No of course it's not true. Unless Cones Hotline 2024 turns out to the winner which it's 1997 predecessor was not.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,162
    Nigelb said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Good news - America has avoided a government shut down.

    Bad news - Its only been achieved by conceding to Republican demands of stripping Ukraine of any new aid.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66973976

    For shame.

    Also the Democrats are temporarily dependent on Joe Manchin for a majority in the Senate.

    "He is known for working with Republicans on issues such as abortion, immigration, energy policy, and gun control."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Manchin
    The stripping of Ukraine aid from the bill has nothing to do with the Senate, which was quite prepared to vote for it. And had indeed done so in a bill originating in the Senate, which the GOP majority House rejected.

    It was entirely because of the GOP in the House of Representatives, where the fight over the 'debt limit' - a constitutionally dubious concept - originated.

    It’s also symbolism. It allows the nutter quasi-fascist wing of the Republicans to vote against the bill (rather than having to vote for it as part of a combined bill).

    Buts it’s going to sail through with Dem and sane Republican support

  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,560
    Leon said:

    Impossibly sexy and petite Chinese girls in really tight wet suits staring contemplatively at the seaplane

    Is there some fairly important context missing here?
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,162
    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Good news - America has avoided a government shut down.

    Bad news - Its only been achieved by conceding to Republican demands of stripping Ukraine of any new aid.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66973976

    For shame.

    Also the Democrats are temporarily dependent on Joe Manchin for a majority in the Senate.

    "He is known for working with Republicans on issues such as abortion, immigration, energy policy, and gun control."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Manchin
    The stripping of Ukraine aid from the bill has nothing to do with the Senate, which was quite prepared to vote for it. And had indeed done so in a bill originating in the Senate, which the GOP majority House rejected.

    It was entirely because of the GOP in the House of Representatives, where the fight over the 'debt limit' - a constitutionally dubious concept - originated.
    For the nut job wing of the Republicans, every dollar sent to Ukraine is a dollar that could be used for corporate welfare, and reducing the tax bills of the wealthiest 0.5%
    of the population.
    You’re too kind to them on their motives
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,162
    Leon said:

    Impossibly sexy and petite Chinese girls in really tight wet suits staring contemplatively at the seaplane

    James Bond isn’t real.
  • Options
    Meanwhile, the government admits that it is about to impose a £320m Brexit tax on the food industry:

    New Brexit border checks to cost business £320mn a year - https://on.ft.com/3Q1FTC0 via @FT

    Amazingly the minister is claiming this cost is actually a saving - as the previous plan would have been £520m more. "You got lucky" said Tory Brexiteers.

    What is the point? There is no transition away from the EEA to replace it with other imports from elsewhere. We will always be doing most trade in food with the closest market because of the nature of food.

    So we remain attached and should remain aligned. These checks are exactly the kind of mentalist approach that the most mentalist of Brexiteers insisted would never ever be required. And yet here we are.
  • Options
    LeonLeon Posts: 47,730

    Leon said:

    Impossibly sexy and petite Chinese girls in really tight wet suits staring contemplatively at the seaplane

    James Bond isn’t real.
    Perhaps. But I went scuba diving with sharks this morning
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,928
    ydoethur said:

    Good heavens above.

    The BBC has finally written a report with some actual, useful information on the energy price cap:

    Specifically, the price of gas is 6.89p per kilowatt hour (kWh), and electricity is 27.35p per kWh.

    The usual method is about as useful as saying petrol has reached £90 a tankful.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,560

    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    Andy_JS said:

    Good news - America has avoided a government shut down.

    Bad news - Its only been achieved by conceding to Republican demands of stripping Ukraine of any new aid.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-66973976

    For shame.

    Also the Democrats are temporarily dependent on Joe Manchin for a majority in the Senate.

    "He is known for working with Republicans on issues such as abortion, immigration, energy policy, and gun control."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Manchin
    The stripping of Ukraine aid from the bill has nothing to do with the Senate, which was quite prepared to vote for it. And had indeed done so in a bill originating in the Senate, which the GOP majority House rejected.

    It was entirely because of the GOP in the House of Representatives, where the fight over the 'debt limit' - a constitutionally dubious concept - originated.
    For the nut job wing of the Republicans, every dollar sent to Ukraine is a dollar that could be used for corporate welfare, and reducing the tax bills of the wealthiest 0.5%
    of the population.
    You’re too kind to them on their motives
    It's also rather unkind to nutjobs.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,560
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Impossibly sexy and petite Chinese girls in really tight wet suits staring contemplatively at the seaplane

    James Bond isn’t real.
    Perhaps. But I went scuba diving with sharks this morning
    Chinese girls are sharks?
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,150
    edited October 2023
    Foxy said:

    Chris said:

    The trouble with Opinium's methodology, if I understand correctly, is that it assumes those expressing support for the Tories are as likely to turn out as they have been in previous elections. Is that really likely to be true, when comparing the next election with Johnson's "Get Brexit Done" election?

    Looking at the header it is a major discrepancy with the 20 point leads in Yougov and We Think. Presumably due to methodology, but possibly just random sampling error in one or all the polls.

    Unless confirmed in other polling after conference season is over,, I wouldn't take it too seriously.
    Probably this particular result is affected by a combination of the two, but the Opinium lead has consistently been 5 points or so smaller than that shown by others, so the methodology must be making a difference.

    The turnout assumption is presented as a kind of empirical solution to the hoary problem of former Tory undecideds, but as they start by excluding undecideds and then adjust turnouts for party supporters, it seems a pretty indirect solution, with no guarantee of accuracy in the future just because it would have given a reasonable result in the past. Surely better to try to tackle the problem directly, as Only Living Boy tried to do here a couple of weeks ago?
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,811
    ydoethur said:

    Eabhal said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    How many of the 1.7 million are involved in planning?
    Not in planning but none of the 11,000 civil servants employed by the DfE, Ofsted and Ofqual are involved in education.
    Not true.

    They are educating us in what not to do in education.


    ydoethur said: Malmesbury said: ydoethur said: Eabhal said: BartholomewRoberts said: MattW said: Benpointer said: Casino_Royale said: biggles said: Casino_Royale said: TimS said:The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12




    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?


    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?

    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.





    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.

    How many of the 1.7 million are involved in planning? Not in planning but none of the 11,000 civil servants employed by the DfE, Ofsted and Ofqual are involved in education.

    Not true.

    They are educating us in what not to do in education.


    Not on a single issue, or in one direction or twain,
    But conclusively, comprehensively, and several times and again,
    Were all our most holy illusions knocked higher than Gilderoy’s kite.
    We have had a jolly good lesson, and it serves us jolly well right!
    They can continue to do that in their own time for free as that numpty Sam Freedman does.

    I was comparing the value of the education in question to that received from the Boer War.

    Perhaps we could send the DfE to clear mines in Ukraine? They would definitely innovate, there.
  • Options
    BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 31,928
    edited October 2023
    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    Chris said:

    The trouble with Opinium's methodology, if I understand correctly, is that it assumes those expressing support for the Tories are as likely to turn out as they have been in previous elections. Is that really likely to be true, when comparing the next election with Johnson's "Get Brexit Done" election?

    Looking at the header it is a major discrepancy with the 20 point leads in Yougov and We Think. Presumably due to methodology, but possibly just random sampling error in one or all the polls.

    Unless confirmed in other polling after conference season is over,, I wouldn't take it too seriously.
    Probably this particular result is affected by a combination of the two, but the Opinium lead has consistently been 5 points or so smaller than that shown by others, so the methodology must be making a difference.

    The turnout assumption is presented as a kind of empirical solution to the hoary problem of former Tory undecideds, but as they start by excluding undecideds and then adjust turnouts for party supporters, it seems a pretty indirect solution, with no guarantee of accuracy in the future just because it would have given a reasonable result in the past. Surely better to try to tackle the problem directly, as Only Living Boy tried to do here a couple of weeks ago?
    Curiously, the Guardian is playing this poll as bad news for the Tories.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/oct/01/poll-spells-trouble-for-rishi-sunak-as-voters-who-lent-votes-look-to-take-them-back
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,539

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
    Its remarkable how last year people were hysterically saying we had no storage, then we exported our surplus through the winter, now the same people are saying the same thing again.

    Our media never learns.
    At the moment we are producing 108.5% of our requirements and 55% of that is from wind. Between wind and nuclear our gas requirements are likely to be significantly less than last year given the huge offshore wind farms that have come online this year. I don't think we will have much to worry about.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,560
    @Malmesbury I think you're the victim of a blockquote SNAFU.
  • Options
    darkagedarkage Posts: 4,803

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    I would imagine that the mushrooming of the state is due largely to the repatriation of state functions after Brexit, plus some kind of yes minister style administrative bloat. The classic, near comical example is the current government setting up a new department - the 'office of local government' (Oflog) within an existing department - the ministry of housing, communities and local government, with a remit to improve the performance of local government. This is administrative bloat in action. They are looking for a director at £149k per year, if anyone is interested in applying.

    https://www.lgcplus.com/politics/governance-and-structure/oflog-chief-to-earn-up-to-149000-14-07-2023/

    Regarding Planning, there are hardly any civil servants involved in planning, the number is almost negligible. Maybe 100 or so?


  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,958
    DavidL said:

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
    Its remarkable how last year people were hysterically saying we had no storage, then we exported our surplus through the winter, now the same people are saying the same thing again.

    Our media never learns.
    At the moment we are producing 108.5% of our requirements and 55% of that is from wind. Between wind and nuclear our gas requirements are likely to be significantly less than last year given the huge offshore wind farms that have come online this year. I don't think we will have much to worry about.
    Isn’t most of our gas demand for domestic heating, not electricity?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,560
    TimS said:

    DavidL said:

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
    Its remarkable how last year people were hysterically saying we had no storage, then we exported our surplus through the winter, now the same people are saying the same thing again.

    Our media never learns.
    At the moment we are producing 108.5% of our requirements and 55% of that is from wind. Between wind and nuclear our gas requirements are likely to be significantly less than last year given the huge offshore wind farms that have come online this year. I don't think we will have much to worry about.
    Isn’t most of our gas demand for domestic heating, not electricity?
    Perhaps Rishi Sunak's recent actions are designed to boost domestic production via vast quantities of hot air.
  • Options
    darkage said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    I would imagine that the mushrooming of the state is due largely to the repatriation of state functions after Brexit, plus some kind of yes minister style administrative bloat. The classic, near comical example is the current government setting up a new department - the 'office of local government' (Oflog) within an existing department - the ministry of housing, communities and local government, with a remit to improve the performance of local government. This is administrative bloat in action. They are looking for a director at £149k per year, if anyone is interested in applying.

    https://www.lgcplus.com/politics/governance-and-structure/oflog-chief-to-earn-up-to-149000-14-07-2023/

    Regarding Planning, there are hardly any civil servants involved in planning, the number is almost negligible. Maybe 100 or so?


    Surely improving the performance of local government is what Rishi is already spending his time and energy on?

    Although of course if they were serious, you don't need a new director to understand the problem. Each year, we cut their real terms funding and mandate they do more and more. Result - cutting corners, demotivation and ultimately failure.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 39,221
    DavidL said:

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
    Its remarkable how last year people were hysterically saying we had no storage, then we exported our surplus through the winter, now the same people are saying the same thing again.

    Our media never learns.
    At the moment we are producing 108.5% of our requirements and 55% of that is from wind. Between wind and nuclear our gas requirements are likely to be significantly less than last year given the huge offshore wind farms that have come online this year. I don't think we will have much to worry about.
    That's 'at the moment', and it is relatively high wind loading, though not unprecedented. On several occasion when I've looked recently, we've been producing far less than 100% of our own electricity (depending on the interconnectors), and with essentially no wind contribution.
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,150

    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    Chris said:

    The trouble with Opinium's methodology, if I understand correctly, is that it assumes those expressing support for the Tories are as likely to turn out as they have been in previous elections. Is that really likely to be true, when comparing the next election with Johnson's "Get Brexit Done" election?

    Looking at the header it is a major discrepancy with the 20 point leads in Yougov and We Think. Presumably due to methodology, but possibly just random sampling error in one or all the polls.

    Unless confirmed in other polling after conference season is over,, I wouldn't take it too seriously.
    Probably this particular result is affected by a combination of the two, but the Opinium lead has consistently been 5 points or so smaller than that shown by others, so the methodology must be making a difference.

    The turnout assumption is presented as a kind of empirical solution to the hoary problem of former Tory undecideds, but as they start by excluding undecideds and then adjust turnouts for party supporters, it seems a pretty indirect solution, with no guarantee of accuracy in the future just because it would have given a reasonable result in the past. Surely better to try to tackle the problem directly, as Only Living Boy tried to do here a couple of weeks ago?
    Curiously, the Guardian is playing this poll as bad news for the Tories.

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/oct/01/poll-spells-trouble-for-rishi-sunak-as-voters-who-lent-votes-look-to-take-them-back
    Based on the comparison with 2019, I suppose even the staunchest Tory optimists would admit it's bad. The only context in which it could be considered good is that recent Labour leads were larger.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,996
    Fishing said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    Farm and other subsidies. Northern Ireland. Foreign aid. Green crap. Diversity BS. Non-palliative care for the over-90s.
    A 91 year old gets an infection that is readily treatable with antibiotics that cost pennies. “No!” cries Fishing. “We should put them in a hospice.”
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,135
    Leon said:

    Impossibly sexy and petite Chinese girls in really tight wet suits staring contemplatively at the seaplane

    Picture please. Make an old man happy!
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,539
    TimS said:

    DavidL said:

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
    Its remarkable how last year people were hysterically saying we had no storage, then we exported our surplus through the winter, now the same people are saying the same thing again.

    Our media never learns.
    At the moment we are producing 108.5% of our requirements and 55% of that is from wind. Between wind and nuclear our gas requirements are likely to be significantly less than last year given the huge offshore wind farms that have come online this year. I don't think we will have much to worry about.
    Isn’t most of our gas demand for domestic heating, not electricity?
    I'm not sure how the figures compare to be honest and a quick google is not really helping. I suspect that historically, when we were reliant on gas for something like 60%+ of our electricity, the figures may have been roughly equivalent but I agree that domestic usage will probably predominate now. We still have some domestic production of gas, of course.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,993
    edited October 2023

    Fishing said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    Farm and other subsidies. Northern Ireland. Foreign aid. Green crap. Diversity BS. Non-palliative care for the over-90s.
    A 91 year old gets an infection that is readily treatable with antibiotics that cost pennies. “No!” cries Fishing. “We should put them in a hospice.”
    Another referral for Dr Shipman, Mr Fishing? You are spoiling us!
  • Options
    GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,035
    isam said:

    TimS said:

    That 7% Reform vote won't be anything like that come election day.

    Mostly not going to Keir "second referendum" Starmer.

    Nor will the Greens get 7%. At a guess id say Ref will be 3% with most of those remaining votes going to abstention or Tory, and Green will be 3% with the gap split between abstention, Lib Dem and Lab.
    It would be an interesting match bet, Green vs Reform % at the next GE. I agree with @carnforth , the Corbynites might well go Green, and they’re probably better organised & more professional than Reform.

    I’d have Greens favourite, 1/2 vs 6/4 maybe? I wonder if any bookie will offer it

    If Farage became Reform leader that would change things I guess
    Farage, a clever prick, will only step up if he sees a gap in the market. The Cons haven’t left much space on the right for him so I daresay he’ll stick to his other grifts for now.

    Plus Lozzo is pretty poisonous at the mo and Nige has generally been careful to not step over the line into full-bore nutjob.

    I still get Reform and Reclaim mixed up fwiw. There’s no strong brand there.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,162

    darkage said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    I would imagine that the mushrooming of the state is due largely to the repatriation of state functions after Brexit, plus some kind of yes minister style administrative bloat. The classic, near comical example is the current government setting up a new department - the 'office of local government' (Oflog) within an existing department - the ministry of housing, communities and local government, with a remit to improve the performance of local government. This is administrative bloat in action. They are looking for a director at £149k per year, if anyone is interested in applying.

    https://www.lgcplus.com/politics/governance-and-structure/oflog-chief-to-earn-up-to-149000-14-07-2023/

    Regarding Planning, there are hardly any civil servants involved in planning, the number is almost negligible. Maybe 100 or so?


    Surely improving the performance of local government is what Rishi is already
    spending his time and energy on?

    Although of course if they were serious, you don't need a new director to understand the problem. Each year, we cut their real terms funding and mandate they do more and more. Result - cutting corners, demotivation and ultimately failure.
    It’s the California problem: they can’t increase taxes and spending demands (principally the social care mandate) goes up at pace. So anything discretionary gets squeezed
  • Options

    darkage said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    I would imagine that the mushrooming of the state is due largely to the repatriation of state functions after Brexit, plus some kind of yes minister style administrative bloat. The classic, near comical example is the current government setting up a new department - the 'office of local government' (Oflog) within an existing department - the ministry of housing, communities and local government, with a remit to improve the performance of local government. This is administrative bloat in action. They are looking for a director at £149k per year, if anyone is interested in applying.

    https://www.lgcplus.com/politics/governance-and-structure/oflog-chief-to-earn-up-to-149000-14-07-2023/

    Regarding Planning, there are hardly any civil servants involved in planning, the number is almost negligible. Maybe 100 or so?


    Surely improving the performance of local government is what Rishi is already spending his time and energy on?

    Although of course if they were serious, you don't need a new director to understand the problem. Each year, we cut their real terms funding and mandate they do more and more. Result - cutting corners, demotivation and ultimately failure.
    Nonsense. So many of our towns are visibly shabby with appalling non-services because they aren't Tory enough. Simply do as Woking council did and they would be quids in.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,539

    DavidL said:

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
    Its remarkable how last year people were hysterically saying we had no storage, then we exported our surplus through the winter, now the same people are saying the same thing again.

    Our media never learns.
    At the moment we are producing 108.5% of our requirements and 55% of that is from wind. Between wind and nuclear our gas requirements are likely to be significantly less than last year given the huge offshore wind farms that have come online this year. I don't think we will have much to worry about.
    That's 'at the moment', and it is relatively high wind loading, though not unprecedented. On several occasion when I've looked recently, we've been producing far less than 100% of our own electricity (depending on the interconnectors), and with essentially no wind contribution.
    Yes but we are heading into winter when it tends to be a bit blowy. Off shore wind will continue to increase its proportion of contribution.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,811
    A
    Foxy said:

    Fishing said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    Farm and other subsidies. Northern Ireland. Foreign aid. Green crap. Diversity BS. Non-palliative care for the over-90s.
    A 91 year old gets an infection that is readily treatable with antibiotics that cost pennies. “No!” cries Fishing. “We should put them in a hospice.”
    Another referral for Dr Shipman, Mr Fishing? You are spoiling us!
    Vasily Mikhailovich Blokhin has entered the chat.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193
    edited October 2023
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    carnforth said:

    Nigelb said:

    Interesting article.

    How will Europe weather a second winter without gas from Russia?
    EU states have worked hard to secure supplies and storage – while the UK seems just to be hoping it stays mild
    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/sep/30/how-will-europe-weather-a-second-winter-without-gas-from-russia

    The storage canard again: every LNG cargo we have under contract, sailing towards us, is storage.

    Like last winter, we will have surplus to pipe to the continent.
    Its remarkable how last year people were hysterically saying we had no storage, then we exported our surplus through the winter, now the same people are saying the same thing again.

    Our media never learns.
    At the moment we are producing 108.5% of our requirements and 55% of that is from wind. Between wind and nuclear our gas requirements are likely to be significantly less than last year given the huge offshore wind farms that have come online this year. I don't think we will have much to worry about.
    That's 'at the moment', and it is relatively high wind loading, though not unprecedented. On several occasion when I've looked recently, we've been producing far less than 100% of our own electricity (depending on the interconnectors), and with essentially no wind contribution.
    Yes but we are heading into winter when it tends to be a bit blowy. Off shore wind will continue to increase its proportion of contribution.
    What you have to worry about is it being minus fifteen with a huge high pressure system sitting over us - and wind making zero contribution because not a single blade is turning.

    The tides will still be delivering to our door twice a day though...
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,193

    Leon said:

    Impossibly sexy and petite Chinese girls in really tight wet suits staring contemplatively at the seaplane

    Picture please. Make an old man happy!
    Just ask AI to generate them for you....
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,135

    Leon said:

    Impossibly sexy and petite Chinese girls in really tight wet suits staring contemplatively at the seaplane

    Picture please. Make an old man happy!
    Just ask AI to generate them for you....
    I’ve come to terms with a lot of tech. Otherwise, I wouldn’t be here!
    But so far, AI and picture generation is beyond me.
  • Options
    FarooqFarooq Posts: 10,798
    Ghedebrav said:

    isam said:

    TimS said:

    That 7% Reform vote won't be anything like that come election day.

    Mostly not going to Keir "second referendum" Starmer.

    Nor will the Greens get 7%. At a guess id say Ref will be 3% with most of those remaining votes going to abstention or Tory, and Green will be 3% with the gap split between abstention, Lib Dem and Lab.
    It would be an interesting match bet, Green vs Reform % at the next GE. I agree with @carnforth , the Corbynites might well go Green, and they’re probably better organised & more professional than Reform.

    I’d have Greens favourite, 1/2 vs 6/4 maybe? I wonder if any bookie will offer it

    If Farage became Reform leader that would change things I guess
    Farage, a clever prick, will only step up if he sees a gap in the market. The Cons haven’t left much space on the right for him so I daresay he’ll stick to his other grifts for now.

    Plus Lozzo is pretty poisonous at the mo and Nige has generally been careful to not step over the line into full-bore nutjob.

    I still get Reform and Reclaim mixed up fwiw. There’s no strong brand there.
    Is this the same Farage who instinctively backs every fash or fash-flavoured politician going? Trump, AfD, Le Pen, Putin, etc?

    Farage has been a full-bore nutjob his whole life
  • Options

    darkage said:

    MattW said:

    biggles said:

    TimS said:

    The Opinium results since the start of the year are:

    45:29
    44:28
    44:27
    44:29
    44:29
    44:29
    41:30
    42:28
    44:26
    43:29
    43:28
    41:28
    44:26
    43:28
    42:25
    40:26
    41:26
    42:28
    41:26
    39:29

    So it’s Labour’s lowest score of the year, but not hugely out of the ordinary for the Tories.

    There’s a trend over the year for Labour to lose a bit of VI - about 2% I’d say on average. Whereas Tory has oscillated around a fairly stable level.

    The marginal gainers have been the Lib Dems. Started the year averaging 8-9, now generally 10-11. They’ve gone:

    9,9,7,9,8,8,9,10,10,11,9,11,8,9,11,10,11,9,11, 12


    Tories going nowhere but that's enough for Labour to be worried if I were Starmer.

    Another year of that and he could be into NOM territory.
    I find the Reform numbers fascinating. Do that many people even know who they are? But then I was amazed in the local elections in Derby in 2022 when I visited, to see them everywhere and doing well. At first I assumed it was an unfortunately named “Reform Derby” set of indies. But no. Maybe they are doing a LibDem, very local strategy. If so, where could they get a seat?
    I think if the Tories were doing Tory things, i.e. cutting tax now rather than having raised it to record highs, then they'd be up at around 34-35%.

    They've lost a slice of their base because they're not playing to it.
    Do you mean lower taxes by borrowing more or lower taxes by cutting public services?

    If the latter, which services would you like to see cut?
    Hmmm.

    Doctors, Nurses, Teachers, Service Support Staff or Care Staff to be slashed?

    I'd say they need to recognise we need a period of higher taxation to help deal with national debt, and fund all those Conservative Govt promises.



    1,726,000 people employed across civil service, public administration and other seems like quite a lot.

    For anyone who's serious about cutting the size of the state though, I think you need to be prepared to say what does the state currently does that it should not.

    I can give a few examples. Number one being planning.
    I would imagine that the mushrooming of the state is due largely to the repatriation of state functions after Brexit, plus some kind of yes minister style administrative bloat. The classic, near comical example is the current government setting up a new department - the 'office of local government' (Oflog) within an existing department - the ministry of housing, communities and local government, with a remit to improve the performance of local government. This is administrative bloat in action. They are looking for a director at £149k per year, if anyone is interested in applying.

    https://www.lgcplus.com/politics/governance-and-structure/oflog-chief-to-earn-up-to-149000-14-07-2023/

    Regarding Planning, there are hardly any civil servants involved in planning, the number is almost negligible. Maybe 100 or so?


    Surely improving the performance of local government is what Rishi is already spending his time and energy on?

    Although of course if they were serious, you don't need a new director to understand the problem. Each year, we cut their real terms funding and mandate they do more and more. Result - cutting corners, demotivation and ultimately failure.
    Nonsense. So many of our towns are visibly shabby with appalling non-services because they aren't Tory enough. Simply do as Woking council did and they would be quids in.
    Up to now, bankrupt councils have been ones that have done something visibly idiotic. As the next budget cycle begins, fundamentally sound councils are also sending out red alerts. Some of this will be shroud waving to justify really unpleasant cuts, but not all if it.

    And in the same way that central government can't balance its books by cutting red tape/foreign aid/woke, councils can't do it off councillor allowances, either.

    But it's OK, because Rishi is going to give 55 towns some of the "cutting HS2" dividend;

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-66973899

    What's that thing about how Britain has never invested properly and we needed Brexit to somehow fix that?
  • Options
    darkagedarkage Posts: 4,803
    Cicero said:

    Russia is already at war with the West. The programme of subversion and propaganda, bribery, blackmail and murder against the UK alone marks Putinist Russia as an aggressor state. Yes, it is a hybrid war rather than a full scale military attack but threats to our communications cables, oil platforms and the rest are simply one step away from acts of war. The aggression in Ukraine will not cease if the West betrays its commitments to Kyiv. In fact Russia has made it clear that the defeat of Ukraine would be merely the first step in the subjugation of the whole of Europe.

    Russia will not stop unless it is stopped. The West must face down the Moscow tyranny, and it is utterly wishful thinking that anything short of the Military defeat of Moscow will save us.

    Russian subversion of the US and other Western democracies is very well advanced. We may only have a few months to save ourselves. To lose would see the end of the freedom we have taken for granted. It really is that simple.

    I think that you are correct that Russia is at war with the west, but this has been the case for at least 20 years, this war is just a stage in that process and not some kind of existential endgame. Inevitably some pragmatism has to come in to play about how resources are best deployed.

    There are also reasons to be optimistic. The reputation of Russia has been destroyed in the west. The war hasn't gone to plan. It has been hard work for them, the war is not that popular in Russia. They have lost vast amounts of troops. Their visions of imperial expansion have been revealed as fantasies. The Wagner group has imploded. NATO has expanded. The Russian economy - based on oil and gas- is going to get more and more obsolete as alternatives evolve and the war has accelerated this.


This discussion has been closed.