Deeply concerned by reports from Gaza and Israel. Civilians must be protected, I am especially horrified to hear about hostage taking, and all violence condemned. This is a significant escalation. I can't see how it ends well for anyone.
Does she tweet most days when the Palestinians are getting their regular doings, wells filled in , property stolen etc. No votes in that so silent.
I think you should probably do a bit of research before spouting off because yes, Lalya Moran does talk about the rights of Palestinians and the oppression they sometimes face at the hands of Israel. You fucking idiot.
It is also bizarre to suggest that in the UK there are "no votes" in supporting Palestinians. There are far more members of the Ummah than there are Jews. In her constituency by a margin of over 5:1.
Deeply concerned by reports from Gaza and Israel. Civilians must be protected, I am especially horrified to hear about hostage taking, and all violence condemned. This is a significant escalation. I can't see how it ends well for anyone.
Does she tweet most days when the Palestinians are getting their regular doings, wells filled in , property stolen etc. No votes in that so silent.
I think you should probably do a bit of research before spouting off because yes, Lalya Moran does talk about the rights of Palestinians and the oppression they sometimes face at the hands of Israel. You fucking idiot.
"I want them to deliver the high speed rail they promised to the North" - Angela Raynor
Has she spoken to Starmer?
I don't see the two points are incompatible.
Starmer is saying HS2 will be forever unaffordable if Rishi scorches the earth and resells the already procured land to developers etc. Rayner I think is saying "Rishi, don't salt the earth, just build HS2"
Sunak has little over a year before he faces the electorate and if Starmer really was committed to the Birmingham - Manchester link he only needs to state Labour will build the line and warn against any developments in the meantime
I really do believe Starmer is quietly pleased as he can attack Sunak's decision while saying he is the one who will see that all the savings will be spent in the north as proposed
I don't think you understand that there is not a piggy bank full of £36b in cash to spend on Northern infrastructure projects. Canning HS2 allows an accounting sleight of hand which in reality doesn't exist. Hence the majority of projects proposed by Rishi have either already been delivered some as long ago as 2014, are already in the pipeline or will never be built.
Then why doesn't Starmer commit to the project in full at Liverpool as he is heading into no 10 in the next year ?
Because, as you already know, the government is salting the earth by selling off the property.
It's like me coming around your house, setting your car on fire, then loudly wondering why you aren't committing to driving it to the supermarket this afternoon.
Starmer unequivocal stance that he will build HS2 with a warning to all developments that he will compulsory purchase any resales without compensation would inhibit any action the government may take in the next year
Snatching land without compensation would be illegal, would it not?
Which is why I was saying compensation would be at the rate paid for the land and no more
Ah but Starmer cannot simply pay the same price because Rishi has a fly in that ointment too, since selling HS2 land back to its original owners will be at revised, higher prices than paid on compulsory purchase, thus creating the precedent that Starmer will need to pay a still-higher price to buy it back again.
Equally Starmer could say we warned you, so the compensation has been set at £1.
Do you feel lucky punk and do you think the general public will feel you’ve been hard done by?
"According to the Reuters news agency, who are translating Netanyahu's statement, the Israeli prime minister goes on to say "our enemy will pay a price, the type of which it has never known"."
The reprisal motive rarely ends well, and is a big part of the problem.
As Gallowgate says upthread. Israel looks weak. His concern as to the response, I think, is well placed.
Israel looks weak, but Netanyahu has never been stronger.
Not sure - there seems to be a lot of internal anger as to why the IDF's response time has been so slow.
"I want them to deliver the high speed rail they promised to the North" - Angela Raynor
Has she spoken to Starmer?
I don't see the two points are incompatible.
Starmer is saying HS2 will be forever unaffordable if Rishi scorches the earth and resells the already procured land to developers etc. Rayner I think is saying "Rishi, don't salt the earth, just build HS2"
Sunak has little over a year before he faces the electorate and if Starmer really was committed to the Birmingham - Manchester link he only needs to state Labour will build the line and warn against any developments in the meantime
I really do believe Starmer is quietly pleased as he can attack Sunak's decision while saying he is the one who will see that all the savings will be spent in the north as proposed
I don't think you understand that there is not a piggy bank full of £36b in cash to spend on Northern infrastructure projects. Canning HS2 allows an accounting sleight of hand which in reality doesn't exist. Hence the majority of projects proposed by Rishi have either already been delivered some as long ago as 2014, are already in the pipeline or will never be built.
Not sure if this has already been mentioned but another good example of this locally. One of the projects included in Sunak's package of infrastructure improvements that will happen using the HS2 money is the extension of the Nottingham Tram system to Clifton South.
Except the extension of the Nottingham Tram system to Clifton South was completed in 2015.
"I want them to deliver the high speed rail they promised to the North" - Angela Raynor
Has she spoken to Starmer?
I don't see the two points are incompatible.
Starmer is saying HS2 will be forever unaffordable if Rishi scorches the earth and resells the already procured land to developers etc. Rayner I think is saying "Rishi, don't salt the earth, just build HS2"
Sunak has little over a year before he faces the electorate and if Starmer really was committed to the Birmingham - Manchester link he only needs to state Labour will build the line and warn against any developments in the meantime
I really do believe Starmer is quietly pleased as he can attack Sunak's decision while saying he is the one who will see that all the savings will be spent in the north as proposed
I don't think you understand that there is not a piggy bank full of £36b in cash to spend on Northern infrastructure projects. Canning HS2 allows an accounting sleight of hand which in reality doesn't exist. Hence the majority of projects proposed by Rishi have either already been delivered some as long ago as 2014, are already in the pipeline or will never be built.
That is one of the many odd things about the announcement. I think it is a way to finesse future obligations but with no immediate benefit.
Recently the NHS Pensions liabilities were drastically revalued down*. I do hope that this was a genuine revaluation rather than smoke and mirrors to justify a dubious election giveaway.
*Incidentally the NHS pension scheme currently has an annual surplus of £4 billion payed into government funds, so isn't the drain on public resources that some here opine.
Tax cuts next spring, and eye catching ones are inevitable. Particularly as the current Government have been called out as the highest taxing government since the Second World War.
Will the voters buy that when tax cuts are clearly unaffordable? And from personal perspectives their mortgage payments and weekly food bills have gone through the roof.
Maybe.
I suspect the one truth Rishi can promote is Labour can't afford tax cuts. The reality is neither can he.
I know the Universities scheme liabilities has also been drastically revised down (that operates differently as there is a fund rather than treated as government revenue and expenditure). Presumably the same must be true of the other public sector schemes for Civil Service, Teachers, Local government, Armed Forces etc. Presumably Private Sector schemes too, as Annuity rates are sharply up.
Is this because Gilt rates are returning to long term historic norms? I could see that being true for funded schemes, but it is less obvious that it should apply to schemes without a ring fenced pot. Any Actuary on here able to comment?
If genuine as a revaluation then it may be that government finances are better than they appear for the long term, provided government keeps borrowing down.
Sky's reporting on Israel is extremely worrying and they expect Israel to retaliate in a massive retaliatory attack
Indeed and shades of Yom Kippur in 1973 albeit not on such a large scale.
There are plenty already trying to analyse the long term ramifications for Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel and of course Gaza as well and as you imply the conclusions are not positive.
I've long argued the solution to the Middle East is money - Saudi Arabia and the UAE have huge amounts of money. Investing in the Gazan economy - rebuilding infrastructure, investing in businesses and people would lead to peace. It did in Northern Ireland, it has in Iraq, it will in Gaza as well.
There's an old adage - if people are busy making money, they are too busy to make trouble. Poverty is the biggest recruiting sergeant for exteremism - mitigate poverty and you weaken the hand of terrorists.
An economically improving Gaza and West Bank would allow Israel to start to cut back its huge defence expenditure and improve its own economic situation.
Sky's reporting on Israel is extremely worrying and they expect Israel to retaliate in a massive retaliatory attack
Indeed and shades of Yom Kippur in 1973 albeit not on such a large scale.
There are plenty already trying to analyse the long term ramifications for Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel and of course Gaza as well and as you imply the conclusions are not positive.
I've long argued the solution to the Middle East is money - Saudi Arabia and the UAE have huge amounts of money. Investing in the Gazan economy - rebuilding infrastructure, investing in businesses and people would lead to peace. It did in Northern Ireland, it has in Iraq, it will in Gaza as well.
There's an old adage - if people are busy making money, they are too busy to make trouble. Poverty is the biggest recruiting sergeant for exteremism - mitigate poverty and you weaken the hand of terrorists.
An economically improving Gaza and West Bank would allow Israel to start to cut back its huge defence expenditure and improve its own economic situation.
The trouble is can you invest without supporting Hamas? I admit I'm no expert on Israel/Palestine.
The other thing to bear in mind is the protests there have been in Iran. The government could well fancy a distraction. Would they even welcome an Israeli attack?
Will people be that fussed by a bit of private jet use ? Doesn't seem to have dented Ms Swift's tour sales
A major problem has arisen in the set off industry, however. New studies have established that trees planted in carbon rich soils, such as peat, are net contributors to carbon in the atmosphere for at least 30 years and potentially longer. They leach carbon out of the soils for wood formation and then contribute CO2 from the process of growing. Once the tree is fully mature the balance may become a net retainer of carbon but it takes a very long time, much longer than we have until supposedly net zero.
This is throwing the offset industry into disarray. Many businesses, wealthy individuals and institutions buy land for forestry on the basis it allows them to carry on as normal whilst being irredeemably smug and patronising. It appears that in doing so they are actually increasing their carbon footprint, not reducing it.
Is it bad that there’s a part of me that want to laugh?
No. I’m similar
I get the same cynical amusement when I am lectured on my globetrotting by people with three dogs and two cars and big houses leaking heat. I have neither dogs nor cars and live in a flat
You make a fair point there. I feel that those of us who are worried about global warning (so most of us), and able to do so, have modified our behaviours to a degree. I doubt if even the absolute zealots do everything they could to reduce their carbon footprint, and those who claim to could probably be picked apart for some hypocrisy or other.
So I'm going to acknowledge that 'your bit' for the climate includes no dog, no car, efficient flat, etc. - well done! And you'll have to let me stick to my no flying, efficient house, ASHP, manic recycling, etc. etc. as 'my bit'.
Each to our own but if we all do a bit, it will make a difference.
It’s a deal! 🥂
Flying every week is hardly environment friendly though.
"I want them to deliver the high speed rail they promised to the North" - Angela Raynor
Has she spoken to Starmer?
I don't see the two points are incompatible.
Starmer is saying HS2 will be forever unaffordable if Rishi scorches the earth and resells the already procured land to developers etc. Rayner I think is saying "Rishi, don't salt the earth, just build HS2"
Sunak has little over a year before he faces the electorate and if Starmer really was committed to the Birmingham - Manchester link he only needs to state Labour will build the line and warn against any developments in the meantime
I really do believe Starmer is quietly pleased as he can attack Sunak's decision while saying he is the one who will see that all the savings will be spent in the north as proposed
I don't think you understand that there is not a piggy bank full of £36b in cash to spend on Northern infrastructure projects. Canning HS2 allows an accounting sleight of hand which in reality doesn't exist. Hence the majority of projects proposed by Rishi have either already been delivered some as long ago as 2014, are already in the pipeline or will never be built.
Then why doesn't Starmer commit to the project in full at Liverpool as he is heading into no 10 in the next year ?
Because, as you already know, the government is salting the earth by selling off the property.
It's like me coming around your house, setting your car on fire, then loudly wondering why you aren't committing to driving it to the supermarket this afternoon.
Starmer unequivocal stance that he will build HS2 with a warning to all developments that he will compulsory purchase any resales without compensation would inhibit any action the government may take in the next year
Snatching land without compensation would be illegal, would it not?
Which is why I was saying compensation would be at the rate paid for the land and no more
Ah but Starmer cannot simply pay the same price because Rishi has a fly in that ointment too, since selling HS2 land back to its original owners will be at revised, higher prices than paid on compulsory purchase, thus creating the precedent that Starmer will need to pay a still-higher price to buy it back again.
Equally Starmer could say we warned you, so the compensation has been set at £1.
Do you feel lucky punk and do you think the general public will feel you’ve been hard done by?
Starmer is a lawyer who wants to be Prime Minister, not a 20-year-old trot standing for president of his student union.
There're some fairly awful piccies doing the rounds. A morning to avoid Twitter.
Reports of armed Palestinian ganga roaming Israeli towns near Gaza, gunning down everyone they see.
Unfortunately the way they have been treating people it is not surprising. If you keep kicking your dog at some point it will bite back.
True . The Palestinians have been kept in disgusting conditions , effectively a prison camp. Their land being stolen daily to make way for illegal settlements. It’s awful to see this violence but no surprise .
Well, I find it a surprise. Indiscriminate slaughter of civilians? Yes, shocking and surprising.
Killing every Israeli is Hamas' stated goal. That they attempt to do so given an opportunity is not a surprise.
That they got the opportunity *is* a surprise, given the efficiency of Israel's intelligence services and armed forces. It should be a career ending surprise for Netanyahu and his government. Which is why we should again not be surprised to see something similar done in Gaza when (and unless Hamas has been armed to a very high standard in secret, I am pretty sure it will be when) the IDF move in.
For all the faults of the political leadership, the IDF is a modern, well trained and disciplined military force.
Yes they will have no hesitation about collateral damage, including civilian casualties, if they believe that the military objective is significant enough.
But I don’t think you can equate that to “indiscriminate slaughter” in the way we have seen with today’s outrage
"I want them to deliver the high speed rail they promised to the North" - Angela Raynor
Has she spoken to Starmer?
I don't see the two points are incompatible.
Starmer is saying HS2 will be forever unaffordable if Rishi scorches the earth and resells the already procured land to developers etc. Rayner I think is saying "Rishi, don't salt the earth, just build HS2"
Sunak has little over a year before he faces the electorate and if Starmer really was committed to the Birmingham - Manchester link he only needs to state Labour will build the line and warn against any developments in the meantime
I really do believe Starmer is quietly pleased as he can attack Sunak's decision while saying he is the one who will see that all the savings will be spent in the north as proposed
I don't think you understand that there is not a piggy bank full of £36b in cash to spend on Northern infrastructure projects. Canning HS2 allows an accounting sleight of hand which in reality doesn't exist. Hence the majority of projects proposed by Rishi have either already been delivered some as long ago as 2014, are already in the pipeline or will never be built.
Then why doesn't Starmer commit to the project in full at Liverpool as he is heading into no 10 in the next year ?
Because, as you already know, the government is salting the earth by selling off the property.
It's like me coming around your house, setting your car on fire, then loudly wondering why you aren't committing to driving it to the supermarket this afternoon.
Starmer unequivocal stance that he will build HS2 with a warning to all developments that he will compulsory purchase any resales without compensation would inhibit any action the government may take in the next year
Snatching land without compensation would be illegal, would it not?
Which is why I was saying compensation would be at the rate paid for the land and no more
Ah but Starmer cannot simply pay the same price because Rishi has a fly in that ointment too, since selling HS2 land back to its original owners will be at revised, higher prices than paid on compulsory purchase, thus creating the precedent that Starmer will need to pay a still-higher price to buy it back again.
Equally Starmer could say we warned you, so the compensation has been set at £1.
Do you feel lucky punk and do you think the general public will feel you’ve been hard done by?
Starmer is a lawyer who wants to be Prime Minister, not a 20-year-old trot standing for president of his student union.
Oh I was just politely pointing out your precedent os nothing of the sort
Hezbollah has released a statement claiming that they are in Direct Contact with Hamas as well as other Palestinian Factions in the Gaza Strip and that they are Warning Israel to be Careful with what their next Actions.
Deeply concerned by reports from Gaza and Israel. Civilians must be protected, I am especially horrified to hear about hostage taking, and all violence condemned. This is a significant escalation. I can't see how it ends well for anyone.
Does she tweet most days when the Palestinians are getting their regular doings, wells filled in , property stolen etc. No votes in that so silent.
She’s being condemned on Twitter for her tweet being too weak in condemning Hamas, so I suppose you critiquing it as not pro-Palestinian enough (Layla is herself half Palestinian) helps to balance things a bit.
It just looks like the usual vacuous politician's comment they get in early to try and look like they actually care to me. Rather than think about it. Both sides are constantly doing nasty things and there does not seem to be any appetite anywhere to do anything to help it.
Deeply concerned by reports from Gaza and Israel. Civilians must be protected, I am especially horrified to hear about hostage taking, and all violence condemned. This is a significant escalation. I can't see how it ends well for anyone.
Does she tweet most days when the Palestinians are getting their regular doings, wells filled in , property stolen etc. No votes in that so silent.
She’s being condemned on Twitter for her tweet being too weak in condemning Hamas, so I suppose you critiquing it as not pro-Palestinian enough (Layla is herself half Palestinian) helps to balance things a bit.
It just looks like the usual vacuous politician's comment they get in early to try and look like they actually care to me. Rather than think about it. Both sides are constantly doing nasty things and there does not seem to be any appetite anywhere to do anything to help it.
I wonder, again, if Netanyahu is about to “solve” it in a fairly spectacular and horrifying way
And will be smashed by Israel in short order. This is the equivalent of Armenia deciding to send tanks and rockets into Turkey. Suicide.
Unless Iran has something more up its sleeve. But what?
If the objective was to defeat Israel in a military conflict then we might expect the attack to concentrate on military targets, even if the intent was to commit genocide once the war was won.
The indiscriminate targeting of civilians suggests that the intent is to provoke a response from Israel that includes indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians. The objectives that make sense would be to either force other Arab states to reverse steps to normalising relations with Israel, to stir up opposition among the population of those Arab states that don't do so, or to provide a pretext for a wider military conflict with Israel, perhaps involving Hezbollah and Iranian forces in Syria.
The ultimate target for this might well be Saudi Arabia, with which Iran has been in a proxy war for some years in Yemen, and has sent drones to attack oil facilities in Saudi Arabia.
BBC: Israeli PM statement in full --- "Citizens of Israel. We are at war, not an operation, not an escalation, a war.
"This morning Hamas launched a murderous surprise attack against the state of Israel and its citizens. We've been at it since early morning.
"I convened the heads of the security system, first of all I instructed to cleanse the settlements of the terrorists who had infiltrated - this operation is being carried out during these hours.
"At the same time, I ordered an extensive reserve mobilization and a retaliatory war with a strength and scope that the enemy had never known.
"The enemy will pay a price he has never known. In the meantime, I call on all citizens of Israel to strictly obey the instructions of the army and the instructions of the Home Command.
It'll be nothing compared to what the Gaza strip gets in return.
Israel’s long term policy with Gaza has pretty obviously always been to make it uninhabitable. Issues with the water supply were thought to make that likely by 2020 but obviously that date wasn’t accurate.
I am just wondering if this latest attack might lead Israel to take a more direct approach a la Azerbaijan and Artsekh. In which case, if I were the Egyptian government I would be really worried right now.
Was this attack by Hamas provoked by anything? Or are they just taking advantage of the Jewish holidays?
If it came as a surprise to the Israelis - and it clearly did - it seems unlikely they had been doing anything (more than the usual) to provoke Hamas.
And yet those who are so quick to condemn the Israelis when they use inappropriate force in response remain silent…
I've criticised Israel plenty in the past, and I have no qualms in condemning Hamas today.
I would agree with you that smoking is not cool. The problem is that people who smoke look cool. That is a fact, and advertising (and tobacco) revenues over the decades prove it.
"You're never alone with a Strand".
Yep. You and your cancer....
I have never smoked and have previously been something of an anti-smoking zealot.
If you recall the "Strand" ad campaign was one of product failure as the Strand smoker was viewed as a Billy no mates character. Also he and the ad were not "cool" and the product failed.
There're some fairly awful piccies doing the rounds. A morning to avoid Twitter.
Reports of armed Palestinian ganga roaming Israeli towns near Gaza, gunning down everyone they see.
Unfortunately the way they have been treating people it is not surprising. If you keep kicking your dog at some point it will bite back.
True . The Palestinians have been kept in disgusting conditions , effectively a prison camp. Their land being stolen daily to make way for illegal settlements. It’s awful to see this violence but no surprise .
Well, I find it a surprise. Indiscriminate slaughter of civilians? Yes, shocking and surprising.
Killing every Israeli is Hamas' stated goal. That they attempt to do so given an opportunity is not a surprise.
That they got the opportunity *is* a surprise, given the efficiency of Israel's intelligence services and armed forces. It should be a career ending surprise for Netanyahu and his government. Which is why we should again not be surprised to see something similar done in Gaza when (and unless Hamas has been armed to a very high standard in secret, I am pretty sure it will be when) the IDF move in.
For all the faults of the political leadership, the IDF is a modern, well trained and disciplined military force.
Yes they will have no hesitation about collateral damage, including civilian casualties, if they believe that the military objective is significant enough.
But I don’t think you can equate that to “indiscriminate slaughter” in the way we have seen with today’s outrage
Bluntly, I except to see the Israeli government at least attempt the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.
That may involve driving people away, rather than shooting them. I suppose from that point of view it is not strictly equivalent.
In light of Hizbollah's statement I wonder if we might see an Israeli attack on Lebanon as well.
"I want them to deliver the high speed rail they promised to the North" - Angela Raynor
Has she spoken to Starmer?
I don't see the two points are incompatible.
Starmer is saying HS2 will be forever unaffordable if Rishi scorches the earth and resells the already procured land to developers etc. Rayner I think is saying "Rishi, don't salt the earth, just build HS2"
Sunak has little over a year before he faces the electorate and if Starmer really was committed to the Birmingham - Manchester link he only needs to state Labour will build the line and warn against any developments in the meantime
I really do believe Starmer is quietly pleased as he can attack Sunak's decision while saying he is the one who will see that all the savings will be spent in the north as proposed
I don't think you understand that there is not a piggy bank full of £36b in cash to spend on Northern infrastructure projects. Canning HS2 allows an accounting sleight of hand which in reality doesn't exist. Hence the majority of projects proposed by Rishi have either already been delivered some as long ago as 2014, are already in the pipeline or will never be built.
Then why doesn't Starmer commit to the project in full at Liverpool as he is heading into no 10 in the next year ?
Because, as you already know, the government is salting the earth by selling off the property.
It's like me coming around your house, setting your car on fire, then loudly wondering why you aren't committing to driving it to the supermarket this afternoon.
Starmer unequivocal stance that he will build HS2 with a warning to all developments that he will compulsory purchase any resales without compensation would inhibit any action the government may take in the next year
Not legally. It might have the effect of dicking around with the price of properties, but it doesn't inhibit the actual sale.
I think they would have a legal case if he went ahead with it (the cost of capital at the very least)
The problem we have with infrastructure in this country isn't the delivery or even necessarily the funding.
It's the process. The root cause being a lack of political courage - to make brave decisions and lead - and then consistency in the follow-through:
"Failing to build things we need is a sure-fire way to get poorer. It gradually strangles an economy, making it harder and harder to live, work and innovate. Yet we seem to have become world leaders in how to not build things. The costs for our infrastructure projects are markedly above those of other countries. The planning and legal processes take longer. The outcomes are less certain.
There are plenty of technical reasons why this is happening, not least a lack of training to produce skilled planners or workers, and fiscal rules that push governments to plan in five-year cycles instead of the 10 to 20 years required. But there is a political and moral reason too. Governments have become incapable of accepting that serving the national interest sometimes involves doing things that are unfair — often deeply unfair — to certain, highly visible, organised groups
The failure to accept this means they instead preside over a much greater, more terrible unfairness: the inexorable decline of British competitiveness. Building more runways or huge pylons or wider roads damages the quality of life of those who live near them. These are unpalatable facts. But somehow we have allowed these facts to overwhelm the greater, pressing national need to modernise the country.
The government avoids grappling directly with these issues by effectively outsourcing policy to the courts, which are then charged with sorting out, over years, which of the various contradictory sets of environmental, human rights or economic policies ought to have priority in each particular case."
In my experience, with quite a few projects in the public sector, there is a key problem that invariably leads to massive cost overruns, timeline overruns, and disappointing outcomes.
Requirements. Poorly laid down, and then incessantly meddled with. Coupled with implausible forecasts on cost and time (sensible ones are produced and rejected at some point in the chain - either before the decision-makers (they'll never endorse this!) or by the decision-makers (that's not acceptable! Try harder!).
But it almost always comes back to the requirements. Get those right and stick to them and all of a sudden, things get delivered. Make them fuzzy, unrealistic, immeasurable, and then flail around with them repeatedly, and then change over your management team again and again as people walk out in despair or are burned out or are moved on because they either didn't hit impossible targets or resisted yet another change in scope, and you end up in a perpetual crisis where progress inches forwards (assuming the direction in which you're being pushed right now can be described as "forwards" for the overall project), or stalls completely while costs balloon.
I would agree with you that smoking is not cool. The problem is that people who smoke look cool. That is a fact, and advertising (and tobacco) revenues over the decades prove it.
"You're never alone with a Strand".
Yep. You and your cancer....
I have never smoked and have previously been something of an anti-smoking zealot.
If you recall the "Strand" ad campaign was one of product failure as the Strand smoker was viewed as a Billy no mates character. Also he and the ad were not "cool" and the product failed.
The product failed but also succeeded when relaunched as (iirc) Embassy Number 10.
Starmer can pledge to send small children up chimneys because the Labour conference will be knocked off the front pages by Israel and the Jimmy Savile docudrama.
The problem we have with infrastructure in this country isn't the delivery or even necessarily the funding.
It's the process. The root cause being a lack of political courage - to make brave decisions and lead - and then consistency in the follow-through:
"Failing to build things we need is a sure-fire way to get poorer. It gradually strangles an economy, making it harder and harder to live, work and innovate. Yet we seem to have become world leaders in how to not build things. The costs for our infrastructure projects are markedly above those of other countries. The planning and legal processes take longer. The outcomes are less certain.
There are plenty of technical reasons why this is happening, not least a lack of training to produce skilled planners or workers, and fiscal rules that push governments to plan in five-year cycles instead of the 10 to 20 years required. But there is a political and moral reason too. Governments have become incapable of accepting that serving the national interest sometimes involves doing things that are unfair — often deeply unfair — to certain, highly visible, organised groups
The failure to accept this means they instead preside over a much greater, more terrible unfairness: the inexorable decline of British competitiveness. Building more runways or huge pylons or wider roads damages the quality of life of those who live near them. These are unpalatable facts. But somehow we have allowed these facts to overwhelm the greater, pressing national need to modernise the country.
The government avoids grappling directly with these issues by effectively outsourcing policy to the courts, which are then charged with sorting out, over years, which of the various contradictory sets of environmental, human rights or economic policies ought to have priority in each particular case."
I’d like to think the Starmer government will get to grips with this. He will surely have the majority to do it; it should be top of his to-do list. Fix the planning system so we can build things
This government could have been trumpeting first zero-carbon power from Swansea tidal lagoon, had Hinkley C-sized Cardiff - 3.2 GW - well under construction and five + more similar nuclear plant sized lagoons out through planning with earth being broken before going to the voters. With all but a tiny amount of seed corn money coming from the private sector. (The amount required equated to three years at 75 yards of HS2 track per year....)
As someone who comes from a sector that built small towns on stilts in the middle of the North Sea, each tasked with being capable of withstanding a once in a hundred-year wave, it is very obviously Government that can't build things. (And if the budget overrun exceeded 10%, you'd get booted out as operator and replaced.)
Tbf it was Tezzie May who foolishly canned your project. And it was a short sighted and ridiculous justification for so doing. This is Rishi's argument for change. All that went before was rubbish so let's look forward and issue petrochemical and gas extraction licences to secure our energy future.
I don't suppose there was too much opportunity for grift with your project. Best to stick up another foreign operated nuclear power plant, trebles all round.
If Rishi REALLY is looking at things on a value for money basis, hard to see Sizewell C ever happening....
Hinkley C - life of project costs now £50bn. To produce 3.26 GW of energy. Lasts 60 years (tops) so to compare with say a Cardiff tidal lagoon - producing 3.2 GW of energy for 120 years minimum - you will need a Hinkley D. Let's be generous and say the life of project costs in 60 years for Hinkley D are £75bn.
Nuclear option - 120 years producing 3.26 GW of energy - £125 bn.
Tidal option - 120 years producing 3.20 GW of energy - £10bn (plus say a pessimistic £10bn for a couple of sets of replacement turbines in that 120 years - £20 bn
That extra 60 MW of production is costing the UK tax payer and bill payer £105 billion...
Happy to talk, RIshi.
I suspect tidal power is too "woke" for the current iteration of your party.
Starmer can pledge to send small children up chimneys because the Labour conference will be knocked off the front pages by Israel and the Jimmy Savile docudrama.
What has Israel been doing with the Jimmy Savile docudrama?
The problem we have with infrastructure in this country isn't the delivery or even necessarily the funding.
It's the process. The root cause being a lack of political courage - to make brave decisions and lead - and then consistency in the follow-through:
"Failing to build things we need is a sure-fire way to get poorer. It gradually strangles an economy, making it harder and harder to live, work and innovate. Yet we seem to have become world leaders in how to not build things. The costs for our infrastructure projects are markedly above those of other countries. The planning and legal processes take longer. The outcomes are less certain.
There are plenty of technical reasons why this is happening, not least a lack of training to produce skilled planners or workers, and fiscal rules that push governments to plan in five-year cycles instead of the 10 to 20 years required. But there is a political and moral reason too. Governments have become incapable of accepting that serving the national interest sometimes involves doing things that are unfair — often deeply unfair — to certain, highly visible, organised groups
The failure to accept this means they instead preside over a much greater, more terrible unfairness: the inexorable decline of British competitiveness. Building more runways or huge pylons or wider roads damages the quality of life of those who live near them. These are unpalatable facts. But somehow we have allowed these facts to overwhelm the greater, pressing national need to modernise the country.
The government avoids grappling directly with these issues by effectively outsourcing policy to the courts, which are then charged with sorting out, over years, which of the various contradictory sets of environmental, human rights or economic policies ought to have priority in each particular case."
The 'problem' if you really want to call it that is that we thankfully live under a system of Common Law rather than Napoleonic law. In France the legal assumption is the State can take your property and the matter of compensation is a political one. In England rights and the assumptions of rights rest with the individual not with the State. Hence the reason all these decisions can now and will always be challenged in the courts.
Unless of course you want to abandon our legal system and adopt Napoleonic law?
I think you could make an argument that there should be only one case / judicial review - an omnibus edition if you like
Part of the problem is the great crested newt people try… and lose. Then the pollution people have a go… then the noise people… and did anyone think of the children?
Each time you have court delays and fact finding, etc etc
If you just said this is the date - use it or lose it - then that would, I think, be a reasonable compromise between protecting people’s rights and expediting the process
The problem we have with infrastructure in this country isn't the delivery or even necessarily the funding.
It's the process. The root cause being a lack of political courage - to make brave decisions and lead - and then consistency in the follow-through:
"Failing to build things we need is a sure-fire way to get poorer. It gradually strangles an economy, making it harder and harder to live, work and innovate. Yet we seem to have become world leaders in how to not build things. The costs for our infrastructure projects are markedly above those of other countries. The planning and legal processes take longer. The outcomes are less certain.
There are plenty of technical reasons why this is happening, not least a lack of training to produce skilled planners or workers, and fiscal rules that push governments to plan in five-year cycles instead of the 10 to 20 years required. But there is a political and moral reason too. Governments have become incapable of accepting that serving the national interest sometimes involves doing things that are unfair — often deeply unfair — to certain, highly visible, organised groups
The failure to accept this means they instead preside over a much greater, more terrible unfairness: the inexorable decline of British competitiveness. Building more runways or huge pylons or wider roads damages the quality of life of those who live near them. These are unpalatable facts. But somehow we have allowed these facts to overwhelm the greater, pressing national need to modernise the country.
The government avoids grappling directly with these issues by effectively outsourcing policy to the courts, which are then charged with sorting out, over years, which of the various contradictory sets of environmental, human rights or economic policies ought to have priority in each particular case."
In my experience, with quite a few projects in the public sector, there is a key problem that invariably leads to massive cost overruns, timeline overruns, and disappointing outcomes.
Requirements. Poorly laid down, and then incessantly meddled with. Coupled with implausible forecasts on cost and time (sensible ones are produced and rejected at some point in the chain - either before the decision-makers (they'll never endorse this!) or by the decision-makers (that's not acceptable! Try harder!).
But it almost always comes back to the requirements. Get those right and stick to them and all of a sudden, things get delivered. Make them fuzzy, unrealistic, immeasurable, and then flail around with them repeatedly, and then change over your management team again and again as people walk out in despair or are burned out or are moved on because they either didn't hit impossible targets or resisted yet another change in scope, and you end up in a perpetual crisis where progress inches forwards (assuming the direction in which you're being pushed right now can be described as "forwards" for the overall project), or stalls completely while costs balloon.
Yep the idea that it was 'planning' that caused the cost of HS2 to go from £36 billion to £180 billion in not much more than a decade is just laughable.
I would agree with you that smoking is not cool. The problem is that people who smoke look cool. That is a fact, and advertising (and tobacco) revenues over the decades prove it.
"You're never alone with a Strand".
Yep. You and your cancer....
I have never smoked and have previously been something of an anti-smoking zealot.
If you recall the "Strand" ad campaign was one of product failure as the Strand smoker was viewed as a Billy no mates character. Also he and the ad were not "cool" and the product failed.
There was a weird truth to the ad though. I, and my other smoker friends who I have discussed it with, find that if you are sitting on your own outside a bar or cafe having a drink you feel less self conscious and “alone” if you are sitting there smoking than if just sitting there. Maybe because you are doing something with your hands and occupied so don’t notice so much being alone.
I would agree with you that smoking is not cool. The problem is that people who smoke look cool. That is a fact, and advertising (and tobacco) revenues over the decades prove it.
"You're never alone with a Strand".
Yep. You and your cancer....
I have never smoked and have previously been something of an anti-smoking zealot.
If you recall the "Strand" ad campaign was one of product failure as the Strand smoker was viewed as a Billy no mates character. Also he and the ad were not "cool" and the product failed.
There was a weird truth to the ad though. I, and my other smoker friends who I have discussed it with, find that if you are sitting on your own outside a bar or cafe having a drink you feel less self conscious and “alone” if you are sitting there smoking than if just sitting there. Maybe because you are doing something with your hands and occupied so don’t notice so much being alone.
Surely the smartphone has solved that problem. With a phone you are - genuinely - never alone, and your hands are always occupied
Horrific scenes in Israel. Families slaughtered at bus stops
The fear is that this Israeli government, the most far right ever, will now enact a Permanent Solution to the Gaza Problem: ejecting them all into Sinai. Perhaps, in a macabre way, that would be better than the endless agony of the last decades
Aaaand we're talking up ethnic cleansing before 9am
What ARE you talking about??
I don’t want this to happen. I don’t want Israelis or Palestinians to die - any of them. The whole thing is a Satanic mess and both sides are at fault - increasingly Israel but the Islamists of Hamas are hardly saints
I am speculating as to possible outcomes and what a very hardline Israeli government might do that no previous Israeli government has dared to do - actually drive the Palestinians out of Gaza. Far right Israeli politicians have talked of this in the past, plenty of times, well now they are in the government - so maybe they will do it
If it happens it would be a crime for the ages - of course - but in the end if the Gazans were given a proper amount of land to settle in Sinai - and their freedom - it might be better than the living prison they inhabit now, which is constantly at war (as we see)
There is no good easy clearly moral solution; quit your pearl clutching
There is, of course, another aspect to any ethnic cleaning of Gaza. Without Gaza, no Palestinian state could possibly be viable, as it is the largest city and the only port (including airport, not that it's operating right now).
It would also change the demographic ratio of the whole area firmly in favour of the Israelis by removing over half the Palestinians.
At that stage the West Bank would almost certainly have to accept its de facto annexation into Israel. The 'facts on the ground' strategy would have borne fruit.
Would Netanyahu do it? Certainly he would, given a pretext.
He has just been given a pretext.
And having emasculated the Israeli courts and split the Knesset, it's hard to see who would stop him.
As the LibDem MP says, it's hard to see how this ends well.
Yes I can absolutely see Netanyahu exploiting this the way you describe. His government is full of people who have PROPOSED versions of this
I once heard Netanyahu compared to Hitler, because of this very issue.
By an Israeli.
Who was not only a senior official of Yad Vashem, but had been forced to leave Iran as a boy because of its own ethnic cleansing of Jews.
Nasty human being (Netanyahu, not Yiftach).
But again, anyone making a hero out of Ismail Haniyeh and his acolytes is overlooking the fact they're just as bad, as any reasoning human being would have worked out but Corbyn apparently couldn't.
This is as OldKingCole says not a conflict where outsiders should look to take sides on moral grounds. Israel is a democracy (rather a flawed one) but it is neither an innocent victim nor an unrelieved goody.
If I am being cynical:
Hamas is strongest in the refugee camps in Jordan; the right to return is one of the most iconic arguments that the Palestinians have.
Could it be that Hamas is trying to provoke Netanyahu into driving the Gazans into Sinai in order to create more camps? Tactical loss for a strategic victory?
It’s not as if they are gaining much from having control of Gaza.
I disagree with your last sentence. By controlling Gaza they deny Israel control of it. If Israel were to take control of the only port under Palestinian rule, and the only airport of any size, the dream of a Palestinian state is dead. The West Bank on its own would be lucky to be allowed the degree of autonomy Turkey allows North Cyprus.
The Jews claimed the right of return to Israel for two millennia. Much good it did them until the early twentieth century.
Hamas doesn’t care about the Palestinans. They are Islamic radicals looking for a pan-Arab solution.
And the political environment today is different than for most of the last 2000 years. The issue of the “right of return” is that land is occupied by people who have bought it in good faith.
Essentially the Palestinian leadership is not saying “let us come back”. They are saying “I want Grandpa Joe’s house back and you need to kick out the current residents”.
Israel has offered monetary compensation at current market values - a huge amount of money - but it was flat out rejected.
The issue is that the Palestinian demand makes Israel non-viable as a state. But “let us go back to our homes” sounds very reasonable in a western newspaper headline
"I want them to deliver the high speed rail they promised to the North" - Angela Raynor
Has she spoken to Starmer?
I don't see the two points are incompatible.
Starmer is saying HS2 will be forever unaffordable if Rishi scorches the earth and resells the already procured land to developers etc. Rayner I think is saying "Rishi, don't salt the earth, just build HS2"
Sunak has little over a year before he faces the electorate and if Starmer really was committed to the Birmingham - Manchester link he only needs to state Labour will build the line and warn against any developments in the meantime
I really do believe Starmer is quietly pleased as he can attack Sunak's decision while saying he is the one who will see that all the savings will be spent in the north as proposed
I don't think you understand that there is not a piggy bank full of £36b in cash to spend on Northern infrastructure projects. Canning HS2 allows an accounting sleight of hand which in reality doesn't exist. Hence the majority of projects proposed by Rishi have either already been delivered some as long ago as 2014, are already in the pipeline or will never be built.
That is one of the many odd things about the announcement. I think it is a way to finesse future obligations but with no immediate benefit.
Recently the NHS Pensions liabilities were drastically revalued down*. I do hope that this was a genuine revaluation rather than smoke and mirrors to justify a dubious election giveaway.
*Incidentally the NHS pension scheme currently has an annual surplus of £4 billion payed into government funds, so isn't the drain on public resources that some here opine.
Tax cuts next spring, and eye catching ones are inevitable. Particularly as the current Government have been called out as the highest taxing government since the Second World War.
Will the voters buy that when tax cuts are clearly unaffordable? And from personal perspectives their mortgage payments and weekly food bills have gone through the roof.
Maybe.
I suspect the one truth Rishi can promote is Labour can't afford tax cuts. The reality is neither can he.
I know the Universities scheme liabilities has also been drastically revised down (that operates differently as there is a fund rather than treated as government revenue and expenditure). Presumably the same must be true of the other public sector schemes for Civil Service, Teachers, Local government, Armed Forces etc. Presumably Private Sector schemes too, as Annuity rates are sharply up.
Is this because Gilt rates are returning to long term historic norms? I could see that being true for funded schemes, but it is less obvious that it should apply to schemes without a ring fenced pot. Any Actuary on here able to comment?
If genuine as a revaluation then it may be that government finances are better than they appear for the long term, provided government keeps borrowing down.
Deeply concerned by reports from Gaza and Israel. Civilians must be protected, I am especially horrified to hear about hostage taking, and all violence condemned. This is a significant escalation. I can't see how it ends well for anyone.
Does she tweet most days when the Palestinians are getting their regular doings, wells filled in , property stolen etc. No votes in that so silent.
I think you should probably do a bit of research before spouting off because yes, Lalya Moran does talk about the rights of Palestinians and the oppression they sometimes face at the hands of Israel. You fucking idiot.
Up yours you cheeky pompous arrogant arsehole. Away and get your thick heid seen to , fecking lunatic.
I can't get over how stupid your message was. How could you attack Layla Moran for not caring about Palestinians? Of all people, her?
I can't even begin to think why you did it. It's baffling.
I did not attack her , just merely pointed out it was your usual vacuous politician's tweet. She has been invisible in UK sinc elast election , not seen or heard a peep from her so can only assume she comments in some obscure niche places. So her immediately popping up here seems to me to be your typical opportunist politician, they care about feck all other than themselves but try to make out they actually care about the great unwashed. It could have been anyone , she just got in early, we will be hearing crap all day from politician's wringing their hands and doing nothing as usual.
You get the sense he's absolutely delighted. At least put a tie on, or go full Zelensky.
I am not suggesting this is the case here. But would one put it past Bibi to launch a false flag operation to justify a genocide?
Maybe I am reading the guy all wrong.
Not on this scale. If it had been four youths with a machine gun on a truck ramming past a checkpoint and shooting a single random stranger before being blown up, perhaps.
I find it pretty difficult to believe he even knew about it and failed to prevent it, which is the other conspiracy theory that will be put forward.
Not, as I said upthread, that I think he cares much about civilian casualties but it's enormously damaging to his government's credibility. He returned to power promising better security for Israel, FFS.
However, it doesn't give any credit for having 0 children. If you really want to reduce your carbon footprint, then don't produce somone who has their own carbon footprint. Your average eco-warrior saving the planet has a tribe of snot-goblins in tow....
I score worse than you, which isn't surprising. I'm currently living with my in-laws in a house heated by coal, using an old diesel car to get around, and sharing meals which are very meat-centred.
All of these things will hopefully be different in a few years time once we have our own place, and the in-laws might be persuaded to avail of some government grants to upgrade their heating and insulation.
6. International flights have knocked me back this year, under 4 without them.
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
I really do lead quite an austere life outside my flights. No car, no pets, a small flat. No second home. I don’t often eat red meat these days. I recycle quite a lot. I walk everywhere I can (I like living in central London for that reason, in part). I use public transport. I don’t buy much new stuff any more - I have all I want. And so on
There're some fairly awful piccies doing the rounds. A morning to avoid Twitter.
Reports of armed Palestinian ganga roaming Israeli towns near Gaza, gunning down everyone they see.
Unfortunately the way they have been treating people it is not surprising. If you keep kicking your dog at some point it will bite back.
True . The Palestinians have been kept in disgusting conditions , effectively a prison camp. Their land being stolen daily to make way for illegal settlements. It’s awful to see this violence but no surprise .
Well, I find it a surprise. Indiscriminate slaughter of civilians? Yes, shocking and surprising.
Killing every Israeli is Hamas' stated goal. That they attempt to do so given an opportunity is not a surprise.
That they got the opportunity *is* a surprise, given the efficiency of Israel's intelligence services and armed forces. It should be a career ending surprise for Netanyahu and his government. Which is why we should again not be surprised to see something similar done in Gaza when (and unless Hamas has been armed to a very high standard in secret, I am pretty sure it will be when) the IDF move in.
For all the faults of the political leadership, the IDF is a modern, well trained and disciplined military force.
Yes they will have no hesitation about collateral damage, including civilian casualties, if they believe that the military objective is significant enough.
But I don’t think you can equate that to “indiscriminate slaughter” in the way we have seen with today’s outrage
What difference do you claim between killing innocent civilian's versus your "indiscriminate slaughter", why is only one an outrage.
Line of the day in today's Times, from a profile of Morgan McSweeney, the latest most powerful man you have never heard of;
“He has the sort of restlessness and data-driven mentality you associate with Dominic Cummings, but without the madness,” another adviser to Starmer said.
Doesn’t that imply the rest of the team aren’t “data driven”?
Is this the first time since 1948 that Israel loses control of its towns and villages? In 1973, the surprise Egyptian and Syrian breakthroughs were in occupied Sinai and Golan, not in sovereign Israel proper.
Horrific scenes in Israel. Families slaughtered at bus stops
The fear is that this Israeli government, the most far right ever, will now enact a Permanent Solution to the Gaza Problem: ejecting them all into Sinai. Perhaps, in a macabre way, that would be better than the endless agony of the last decades
Aaaand we're talking up ethnic cleansing before 9am
What ARE you talking about??
I don’t want this to happen. I don’t want Israelis or Palestinians to die - any of them. The whole thing is a Satanic mess and both sides are at fault - increasingly Israel but the Islamists of Hamas are hardly saints
I am speculating as to possible outcomes and what a very hardline Israeli government might do that no previous Israeli government has dared to do - actually drive the Palestinians out of Gaza. Far right Israeli politicians have talked of this in the past, plenty of times, well now they are in the government - so maybe they will do it
If it happens it would be a crime for the ages - of course - but in the end if the Gazans were given a proper amount of land to settle in Sinai - and their freedom - it might be better than the living prison they inhabit now, which is constantly at war (as we see)
There is no good easy clearly moral solution; quit your pearl clutching
There is, of course, another aspect to any ethnic cleaning of Gaza. Without Gaza, no Palestinian state could possibly be viable, as it is the largest city and the only port (including airport, not that it's operating right now).
It would also change the demographic ratio of the whole area firmly in favour of the Israelis by removing over half the Palestinians.
At that stage the West Bank would almost certainly have to accept its de facto annexation into Israel. The 'facts on the ground' strategy would have borne fruit.
Would Netanyahu do it? Certainly he would, given a pretext.
He has just been given a pretext.
And having emasculated the Israeli courts and split the Knesset, it's hard to see who would stop him.
As the LibDem MP says, it's hard to see how this ends well.
Yes I can absolutely see Netanyahu exploiting this the way you describe. His government is full of people who have PROPOSED versions of this
I once heard Netanyahu compared to Hitler, because of this very issue.
By an Israeli.
Who was not only a senior official of Yad Vashem, but had been forced to leave Iran as a boy because of its own ethnic cleansing of Jews.
Nasty human being (Netanyahu, not Yiftach).
But again, anyone making a hero out of Ismail Haniyeh and his acolytes is overlooking the fact they're just as bad, as any reasoning human being would have worked out but Corbyn apparently couldn't.
This is as OldKingCole says not a conflict where outsiders should look to take sides on moral grounds. Israel is a democracy (rather a flawed one) but it is neither an innocent victim nor an unrelieved goody.
In this particular instance, Israel is surely the victim. Hamas has launched what looks like an armed invasion, with thousands of rockets and apparently indiscriminate slaughter. The provocation was not Israel but more likely Iran's desperation to undermine the recent deals Israel has made with Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries. Leon might be right that Israel's government will exploit this, but that is not to say they caused or invited it.
I agree this is on Hamas. All the way. They are acting as they have always sought to, on a vast scale apparently, and demonstrating why the Israelis hate and fear them.
I do wonder however whether you're altogether right about the Israeli government reaction (leaving aside, for the moment, the somewhat separate issue about the extent to which their policies over the years have caused it). Sure, this isn't what they *invited* but if Netanyahu can exploit it to capture Gaza and expel the Palestinian population there I suspect privately he will be very pleased. And whatever he says in public, I doubt if he really cares about the lives of Israeli civilians any more than he does Palestinian ones.
A big question is: does Hamas have a different, better plan this time? Something that doesn’t end the normal way - with Israel beating the shit out of gaza for six months and 5000 dead Palestinians?
Coz that’s how it always ends so far. Is it possible they have something slightly more strategic in mind?
And I think that's a good question but I also think it's too early to say.
Bluntly from what I know, I cannot see how Hamas could win a full war against Israel without direct help from an outside power. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't be willing to try. As we've seen elsewhere recently it's easier to pretend to have a good army than to have one.
Or it may be a sign that analysts predicting Gaza would become uninhabitable are right (even if the date was wrong) and this is their last roll of the dice to do something drastic that would let them hang on to it before it has to be evacuated.
And civilians end up getting killed. At the moment, it's the Israelis. Later, if the IDF can retaliate, it will be Palestinians as well.
We can be fairly certain the IDF can and will retaliate
I'm certain they will want to.
I want to see more about their actual capabilities in this situation before I definitely say they can.
Er, what? Israel can just send endless missiles into Gaza and strafe it with dozens of jets. The Gazans have zero protection and no way of stopping this
They could vote for parties which want peace and compromise at the next elections. The last ones were in 2006 so I assume the next ones are soon.
I would agree with you that smoking is not cool. The problem is that people who smoke look cool. That is a fact, and advertising (and tobacco) revenues over the decades prove it.
"You're never alone with a Strand".
Yep. You and your cancer....
I have never smoked and have previously been something of an anti-smoking zealot.
If you recall the "Strand" ad campaign was one of product failure as the Strand smoker was viewed as a Billy no mates character. Also he and the ad were not "cool" and the product failed.
There was a weird truth to the ad though. I, and my other smoker friends who I have discussed it with, find that if you are sitting on your own outside a bar or cafe having a drink you feel less self conscious and “alone” if you are sitting there smoking than if just sitting there. Maybe because you are doing something with your hands and occupied so don’t notice so much being alone.
Surely the smartphone has solved that problem. With a phone you are - genuinely - never alone, and your hands are always occupied
Yes agreed but it does distract from people watching which is always interesting and fun. You can look at your smartphone anytime.
"I want them to deliver the high speed rail they promised to the North" - Angela Raynor
Has she spoken to Starmer?
I don't see the two points are incompatible.
Starmer is saying HS2 will be forever unaffordable if Rishi scorches the earth and resells the already procured land to developers etc. Rayner I think is saying "Rishi, don't salt the earth, just build HS2"
Sunak has little over a year before he faces the electorate and if Starmer really was committed to the Birmingham - Manchester link he only needs to state Labour will build the line and warn against any developments in the meantime
I really do believe Starmer is quietly pleased as he can attack Sunak's decision while saying he is the one who will see that all the savings will be spent in the north as proposed
I don't think you understand that there is not a piggy bank full of £36b in cash to spend on Northern infrastructure projects. Canning HS2 allows an accounting sleight of hand which in reality doesn't exist. Hence the majority of projects proposed by Rishi have either already been delivered some as long ago as 2014, are already in the pipeline or will never be built.
Then why doesn't Starmer commit to the project in full at Liverpool as he is heading into no 10 in the next year ?
Because, as you already know, the government is salting the earth by selling off the property.
It's like me coming around your house, setting your car on fire, then loudly wondering why you aren't committing to driving it to the supermarket this afternoon.
Starmer unequivocal stance that he will build HS2 with a warning to all developments that he will compulsory purchase any resales without compensation would inhibit any action the government may take in the next year
Not legally. It might have the effect of dicking around with the price of properties, but it doesn't inhibit the actual sale.
I think they would have a legal case if he went ahead with it (the cost of capital at the very least)
But if it hasn't been sold by the government, there are no buyer4s to have a legal case, surely?
Horrific scenes in Israel. Families slaughtered at bus stops
The fear is that this Israeli government, the most far right ever, will now enact a Permanent Solution to the Gaza Problem: ejecting them all into Sinai. Perhaps, in a macabre way, that would be better than the endless agony of the last decades
Aaaand we're talking up ethnic cleansing before 9am
What ARE you talking about??
I don’t want this to happen. I don’t want Israelis or Palestinians to die - any of them. The whole thing is a Satanic mess and both sides are at fault - increasingly Israel but the Islamists of Hamas are hardly saints
I am speculating as to possible outcomes and what a very hardline Israeli government might do that no previous Israeli government has dared to do - actually drive the Palestinians out of Gaza. Far right Israeli politicians have talked of this in the past, plenty of times, well now they are in the government - so maybe they will do it
If it happens it would be a crime for the ages - of course - but in the end if the Gazans were given a proper amount of land to settle in Sinai - and their freedom - it might be better than the living prison they inhabit now, which is constantly at war (as we see)
There is no good easy clearly moral solution; quit your pearl clutching
There is, of course, another aspect to any ethnic cleaning of Gaza. Without Gaza, no Palestinian state could possibly be viable, as it is the largest city and the only port (including airport, not that it's operating right now).
It would also change the demographic ratio of the whole area firmly in favour of the Israelis by removing over half the Palestinians.
At that stage the West Bank would almost certainly have to accept its de facto annexation into Israel. The 'facts on the ground' strategy would have borne fruit.
Would Netanyahu do it? Certainly he would, given a pretext.
He has just been given a pretext.
And having emasculated the Israeli courts and split the Knesset, it's hard to see who would stop him.
As the LibDem MP says, it's hard to see how this ends well.
Yes I can absolutely see Netanyahu exploiting this the way you describe. His government is full of people who have PROPOSED versions of this
I once heard Netanyahu compared to Hitler, because of this very issue.
By an Israeli.
Who was not only a senior official of Yad Vashem, but had been forced to leave Iran as a boy because of its own ethnic cleansing of Jews.
Nasty human being (Netanyahu, not Yiftach).
But again, anyone making a hero out of Ismail Haniyeh and his acolytes is overlooking the fact they're just as bad, as any reasoning human being would have worked out but Corbyn apparently couldn't.
This is as OldKingCole says not a conflict where outsiders should look to take sides on moral grounds. Israel is a democracy (rather a flawed one) but it is neither an innocent victim nor an unrelieved goody.
In this particular instance, Israel is surely the victim. Hamas has launched what looks like an armed invasion, with thousands of rockets and apparently indiscriminate slaughter. The provocation was not Israel but more likely Iran's desperation to undermine the recent deals Israel has made with Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries. Leon might be right that Israel's government will exploit this, but that is not to say they caused or invited it.
I agree this is on Hamas. All the way. They are acting as they have always sought to, on a vast scale apparently, and demonstrating why the Israelis hate and fear them.
I do wonder however whether you're altogether right about the Israeli government reaction (leaving aside, for the moment, the somewhat separate issue about the extent to which their policies over the years have caused it). Sure, this isn't what they *invited* but if Netanyahu can exploit it to capture Gaza and expel the Palestinian population there I suspect privately he will be very pleased. And whatever he says in public, I doubt if he really cares about the lives of Israeli civilians any more than he does Palestinian ones.
A big question is: does Hamas have a different, better plan this time? Something that doesn’t end the normal way - with Israel beating the shit out of gaza for six months and 5000 dead Palestinians?
Coz that’s how it always ends so far. Is it possible they have something slightly more strategic in mind?
And I think that's a good question but I also think it's too early to say.
Bluntly from what I know, I cannot see how Hamas could win a full war against Israel without direct help from an outside power. But that doesn't mean they wouldn't be willing to try. As we've seen elsewhere recently it's easier to pretend to have a good army than to have one.
Or it may be a sign that analysts predicting Gaza would become uninhabitable are right (even if the date was wrong) and this is their last roll of the dice to do something drastic that would let them hang on to it before it has to be evacuated.
And civilians end up getting killed. At the moment, it's the Israelis. Later, if the IDF can retaliate, it will be Palestinians as well.
We can be fairly certain the IDF can and will retaliate
I'm certain they will want to.
I want to see more about their actual capabilities in this situation before I definitely say they can.
Er, what? Israel can just send endless missiles into Gaza and strafe it with dozens of jets. The Gazans have zero protection and no way of stopping this
They could vote for parties which want peace and compromise at the next elections. The last ones were in 2006 so I assume the next ones are soon.
Sky's reporting on Israel is extremely worrying and they expect Israel to retaliate in a massive retaliatory attack
Indeed and shades of Yom Kippur in 1973 albeit not on such a large scale.
There are plenty already trying to analyse the long term ramifications for Iran, Saudi Arabia, Israel and of course Gaza as well and as you imply the conclusions are not positive.
I've long argued the solution to the Middle East is money - Saudi Arabia and the UAE have huge amounts of money. Investing in the Gazan economy - rebuilding infrastructure, investing in businesses and people would lead to peace. It did in Northern Ireland, it has in Iraq, it will in Gaza as well.
There's an old adage - if people are busy making money, they are too busy to make trouble. Poverty is the biggest recruiting sergeant for exteremism - mitigate poverty and you weaken the hand of terrorists.
An economically improving Gaza and West Bank would allow Israel to start to cut back its huge defence expenditure and improve its own economic situation.
Agree 100%. Also, Gaza is not Iraq or Afghanistan, it is roughly the size and population of Surrey. Smaller than Bosnia. It is small enough that an international peace keeping force could keep the peace.
Starmer can pledge to send small children up chimneys because the Labour conference will be knocked off the front pages by Israel and the Jimmy Savile docudrama.
Careful there. The conspiracy theorists might put two and two together.
The Israeli government has no intention of ever agreeing to any sort of peace plan unless it’s a total surrender where they get 95% of the pie and the scraps are left for the Palestinians.
No, it is not.
Seeking to justify attacks on civilians is disgusting.
6. International flights have knocked me back this year, under 4 without them.
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
I really do lead quite an austere life outside my flights. No car, no pets, a small flat. No second home. I don’t often eat red meat these days. I recycle quite a lot. I walk everywhere I can (I like living in central London for that reason, in part). I use public transport. I don’t buy much new stuff any more - I have all I want. And so on
Frustrating that it doesn't produce a breakdown. I assume my Aircon is the the main driver for me - I even have a heat pump and solar panels now!
It'll be nothing compared to what the Gaza strip gets in return.
Israel’s long term policy with Gaza has pretty obviously always been to make it uninhabitable. Issues with the water supply were thought to make that likely by 2020 but obviously that date wasn’t accurate.
I am just wondering if this latest attack might lead Israel to take a more direct approach a la Azerbaijan and Artsekh. In which case, if I were the Egyptian government I would be really worried right now.
Was this attack by Hamas provoked by anything? Or are they just taking advantage of the Jewish holidays?
If it came as a surprise to the Israelis - and it clearly did - it seems unlikely they had been doing anything (more than the usual) to provoke Hamas.
There’s just been a news item about this particular issue. Mrs C asked me “which side are we on?” I had to say that I didn’t know; both as bad as each other, perhaps. At the beginning, back in the 40’s and 50’s, one could, reasonably, have sympathy for the Israelis, but now???
I’m sorry but WTAF?
These are innocent civilians who have been attacked by terrorists.
Are you really unable to separate that from the actions of the Israeli government?
You think the Israeli's doing the same thing in Gaza is any different. Two cheeks of the same arse at the top , civilians have little say in it, though they must vote for these clowns.
The difference is intention.
Hamas is attacking civilians because (a) they want to cause terror; and (b) they want to exterminate all Hews
Israel attacks military targets. They are much more tolerant of civilian casualties than we would be. The excessive loss of life and damage is rightly condemned.
6. International flights have knocked me back this year, under 4 without them.
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
I really do lead quite an austere life outside my flights. No car, no pets, a small flat. No second home. I don’t often eat red meat these days. I recycle quite a lot. I walk everywhere I can (I like living in central London for that reason, in part). I use public transport. I don’t buy much new stuff any more - I have all I want. And so on
Frustrating that it doesn't produce a breakdown. I assume my Aircon is the the main driver for me - I even have a heat pump and solar panels now!
It does give a breakdown. If you go into the “how I can improve” section at the end it will tell you what’s going wrong and provide stats. For me, unsurprisingly, it’s the flying
However, it doesn't give any credit for having 0 children. If you really want to reduce your carbon footprint, then don't produce somone who has their own carbon footprint. Your average eco-warrior saving the planet has a tribe of snot-goblins in tow....
Not having children isn't going to reduce the global population fast enough to meaningfully influence climate change in the next century, but it will exacerbate the demographic crisis.
6. International flights have knocked me back this year, under 4 without them.
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
I really do lead quite an austere life outside my flights. No car, no pets, a small flat. No second home. I don’t often eat red meat these days. I recycle quite a lot. I walk everywhere I can (I like living in central London for that reason, in part). I use public transport. I don’t buy much new stuff any more - I have all I want. And so on
Frustrating that it doesn't produce a breakdown. I assume my Aircon is the the main driver for me - I even have a heat pump and solar panels now!
It does give a breakdown. If you go into the “how I can improve” section at the end it will tell you what’s going wrong and provide stats. For me, unsurprisingly, it’s the flying
Sure, but they don't give you a breakdown of household energy use.
However, it doesn't give any credit for having 0 children. If you really want to reduce your carbon footprint, then don't produce somone who has their own carbon footprint. Your average eco-warrior saving the planet has a tribe of snot-goblins in tow....
It'll be nothing compared to what the Gaza strip gets in return.
Israel’s long term policy with Gaza has pretty obviously always been to make it uninhabitable. Issues with the water supply were thought to make that likely by 2020 but obviously that date wasn’t accurate.
I am just wondering if this latest attack might lead Israel to take a more direct approach a la Azerbaijan and Artsekh. In which case, if I were the Egyptian government I would be really worried right now.
Was this attack by Hamas provoked by anything? Or are they just taking advantage of the Jewish holidays?
If it came as a surprise to the Israelis - and it clearly did - it seems unlikely they had been doing anything (more than the usual) to provoke Hamas.
There’s just been a news item about this particular issue. Mrs C asked me “which side are we on?” I had to say that I didn’t know; both as bad as each other, perhaps. At the beginning, back in the 40’s and 50’s, one could, reasonably, have sympathy for the Israelis, but now???
I’m sorry but WTAF?
These are innocent civilians who have been attacked by terrorists.
Are you really unable to separate that from the actions of the Israeli government?
You think the Israeli's doing the same thing in Gaza is any different. Two cheeks of the same arse at the top , civilians have little say in it, though they must vote for these clowns.
The difference is intention.
Hamas is attacking civilians because (a) they want to cause terror; and (b) they want to exterminate all Hews
Israel attacks military targets. They are much more tolerant of civilian casualties than we would be. The excessive loss of life and damage is rightly condemned.
6. International flights have knocked me back this year, under 4 without them.
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
I really do lead quite an austere life outside my flights. No car, no pets, a small flat. No second home. I don’t often eat red meat these days. I recycle quite a lot. I walk everywhere I can (I like living in central London for that reason, in part). I use public transport. I don’t buy much new stuff any more - I have all I want. And so on
The idea red meat is a problem is sheer propaganda.
However, it doesn't give any credit for having 0 children. If you really want to reduce your carbon footprint, then don't produce somone who has their own carbon footprint. Your average eco-warrior saving the planet has a tribe of snot-goblins in tow....
Not having children isn't going to reduce the global population fast enough to meaningfully influence climate change in the next century, but it will exacerbate the demographic crisis.
Yes I’m not at all sure “having no kids” is a definite positive for the future of humanity
If it was we should all have no kids and we’ll solve the climate crisis by going extinct. Great
6.7 tonnes, also a climate consumer. We don't fly much, we are on a renewables electricity contract and I'm a vegetarian, but we have a large diesel car and gas heating, and 3 kids.
"I want them to deliver the high speed rail they promised to the North" - Angela Raynor
Has she spoken to Starmer?
I don't see the two points are incompatible.
Starmer is saying HS2 will be forever unaffordable if Rishi scorches the earth and resells the already procured land to developers etc. Rayner I think is saying "Rishi, don't salt the earth, just build HS2"
Sunak has little over a year before he faces the electorate and if Starmer really was committed to the Birmingham - Manchester link he only needs to state Labour will build the line and warn against any developments in the meantime
I really do believe Starmer is quietly pleased as he can attack Sunak's decision while saying he is the one who will see that all the savings will be spent in the north as proposed
I don't think you understand that there is not a piggy bank full of £36b in cash to spend on Northern infrastructure projects. Canning HS2 allows an accounting sleight of hand which in reality doesn't exist. Hence the majority of projects proposed by Rishi have either already been delivered some as long ago as 2014, are already in the pipeline or will never be built.
That is one of the many odd things about the announcement. I think it is a way to finesse future obligations but with no immediate benefit.
Recently the NHS Pensions liabilities were drastically revalued down*. I do hope that this was a genuine revaluation rather than smoke and mirrors to justify a dubious election giveaway.
*Incidentally the NHS pension scheme currently has an annual surplus of £4 billion payed into government funds, so isn't the drain on public resources that some here opine.
Tax cuts next spring, and eye catching ones are inevitable. Particularly as the current Government have been called out as the highest taxing government since the Second World War.
Will the voters buy that when tax cuts are clearly unaffordable? And from personal perspectives their mortgage payments and weekly food bills have gone through the roof.
Maybe.
I suspect the one truth Rishi can promote is Labour can't afford tax cuts. The reality is neither can he.
I know the Universities scheme liabilities has also been drastically revised down (that operates differently as there is a fund rather than treated as government revenue and expenditure). Presumably the same must be true of the other public sector schemes for Civil Service, Teachers, Local government, Armed Forces etc. Presumably Private Sector schemes too, as Annuity rates are sharply up.
Is this because Gilt rates are returning to long term historic norms? I could see that being true for funded schemes, but it is less obvious that it should apply to schemes without a ring fenced pot. Any Actuary on here able to comment?
If genuine as a revaluation then it may be that government finances are better than they appear for the long term, provided government keeps borrowing down.
Indeed. But you thesis fails on the last 5 words.
We have seen this before, though, with various pension schemes flip-flopping between surplus and deficit at the stroke of an actuary's pen. It has seen pension holidays and pension raids and pension-driven takeovers. It is ironic that the pensions industry is so susceptible to short term thinking.
6. International flights have knocked me back this year, under 4 without them.
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
I really do lead quite an austere life outside my flights. No car, no pets, a small flat. No second home. I don’t often eat red meat these days. I recycle quite a lot. I walk everywhere I can (I like living in central London for that reason, in part). I use public transport. I don’t buy much new stuff any more - I have all I want. And so on
The idea red meat is a problem is sheer propaganda.
No, it really is, in several ways
Also it’s bad for you to eat too much red meat. 1-2 times a week is fine. Eat more fish and game
The problem we have with infrastructure in this country isn't the delivery or even necessarily the funding.
It's the process. The root cause being a lack of political courage - to make brave decisions and lead - and then consistency in the follow-through:
"Failing to build things we need is a sure-fire way to get poorer. It gradually strangles an economy, making it harder and harder to live, work and innovate. Yet we seem to have become world leaders in how to not build things. The costs for our infrastructure projects are markedly above those of other countries. The planning and legal processes take longer. The outcomes are less certain.
There are plenty of technical reasons why this is happening, not least a lack of training to produce skilled planners or workers, and fiscal rules that push governments to plan in five-year cycles instead of the 10 to 20 years required. But there is a political and moral reason too. Governments have become incapable of accepting that serving the national interest sometimes involves doing things that are unfair — often deeply unfair — to certain, highly visible, organised groups
The failure to accept this means they instead preside over a much greater, more terrible unfairness: the inexorable decline of British competitiveness. Building more runways or huge pylons or wider roads damages the quality of life of those who live near them. These are unpalatable facts. But somehow we have allowed these facts to overwhelm the greater, pressing national need to modernise the country.
The government avoids grappling directly with these issues by effectively outsourcing policy to the courts, which are then charged with sorting out, over years, which of the various contradictory sets of environmental, human rights or economic policies ought to have priority in each particular case."
The 'problem' if you really want to call it that is that we thankfully live under a system of Common Law rather than Napoleonic law. In France the legal assumption is the State can take your property and the matter of compensation is a political one. In England rights and the assumptions of rights rest with the individual not with the State. Hence the reason all these decisions can now and will always be challenged in the courts.
Unless of course you want to abandon our legal system and adopt Napoleonic law?
I think you could make an argument that there should be only one case / judicial review - an omnibus edition if you like
Part of the problem is the great crested newt people try… and lose. Then the pollution people have a go… then the noise people… and did anyone think of the children?
Each time you have court delays and fact finding, etc etc
If you just said this is the date - use it or lose it - then that would, I think, be a reasonable compromise between protecting people’s rights and expediting the process
People look to France and ask why they can do things so much cheaper and quicker.
Well to start with their population density is a hell of a lot less than ours.
When they built the TGV Med in the early 2000s they needed to buy 285 properties over a distance of 406km of track. Less than 1 property per km. (actually 0.7)
Up until they were cancelled the second two phases of HS2 had bought almost 1000 properties over a distance of 142km of track. 7 properties per km. That is 10 times as many properties per km.
The other point is that the actual decision making on the route is far more devolved in France. There are 4 stages.
The Central Government decides the main trends and route options, by publishing a strategic scheme of the new infrastructure projects.
On a regional scale, preliminary studies isolate a study zone 10km to 20km wide, in cooperation with the regional elected representatives. Then this study zone is to a zone 1km wide.
On a local scale, the APS (Avant-Projet Sommaire or Preliminary Draft) is established in collaboration with the mayors concerned with the various alternatives within 1km zone.
A public enquiry is then held where the local population can decide on where, within that 300m perimieter the actual lie should run (within the technical constraints set out to make the whole thing work).
Russia is clearly behind this. No ally of HAMAS except of Russia has experience of using bomb-dropping drones against modern battle tanks. Only Russia could train HAMAS in this: [Video of drone dropping bomb on Israeli tank]
The problem we have with infrastructure in this country isn't the delivery or even necessarily the funding.
It's the process. The root cause being a lack of political courage - to make brave decisions and lead - and then consistency in the follow-through:
"Failing to build things we need is a sure-fire way to get poorer. It gradually strangles an economy, making it harder and harder to live, work and innovate. Yet we seem to have become world leaders in how to not build things. The costs for our infrastructure projects are markedly above those of other countries. The planning and legal processes take longer. The outcomes are less certain.
There are plenty of technical reasons why this is happening, not least a lack of training to produce skilled planners or workers, and fiscal rules that push governments to plan in five-year cycles instead of the 10 to 20 years required. But there is a political and moral reason too. Governments have become incapable of accepting that serving the national interest sometimes involves doing things that are unfair — often deeply unfair — to certain, highly visible, organised groups
The failure to accept this means they instead preside over a much greater, more terrible unfairness: the inexorable decline of British competitiveness. Building more runways or huge pylons or wider roads damages the quality of life of those who live near them. These are unpalatable facts. But somehow we have allowed these facts to overwhelm the greater, pressing national need to modernise the country.
The government avoids grappling directly with these issues by effectively outsourcing policy to the courts, which are then charged with sorting out, over years, which of the various contradictory sets of environmental, human rights or economic policies ought to have priority in each particular case."
The 'problem' if you really want to call it that is that we thankfully live under a system of Common Law rather than Napoleonic law. In France the legal assumption is the State can take your property and the matter of compensation is a political one. In England rights and the assumptions of rights rest with the individual not with the State. Hence the reason all these decisions can now and will always be challenged in the courts.
Unless of course you want to abandon our legal system and adopt Napoleonic law?
I think you could make an argument that there should be only one case / judicial review - an omnibus edition if you like
Part of the problem is the great crested newt people try… and lose. Then the pollution people have a go… then the noise people… and did anyone think of the children?
Each time you have court delays and fact finding, etc etc
If you just said this is the date - use it or lose it - then that would, I think, be a reasonable compromise between protecting people’s rights and expediting the process
People look to France and ask why they can do things so much cheaper and quicker.
Well to start with their population density is a hell of a lot less than ours.
When they built the TGV Med in the early 2000s they needed to buy 285 properties over a distance of 406km of track. Less than 1 property per km. (actually 0.7)
Up until they were cancelled the second two phases of HS2 had bought almost 1000 properties over a distance of 142km of track. 7 properties per km. That is 10 times as many properties per km.
The other point is that the actual decision making on the route is far more devolved in France. There are 4 stages.
The Central Government decides the main trends and route options, by publishing a strategic scheme of the new infrastructure projects.
On a regional scale, preliminary studies isolate a study zone 10km to 20km wide, in cooperation with the regional elected representatives. Then this study zone is to a zone 1km wide.
On a local scale, the APS (Avant-Projet Sommaire or Preliminary Draft) is established in collaboration with the mayors concerned with the various alternatives within 1km zone.
A public enquiry is then held where the local population can decide on where, within that 300m perimieter the actual lie should run (within the technical constraints set out to make the whole thing work).
And even with that lower population density, they have over double the number of people living in apartments.
6. International flights have knocked me back this year, under 4 without them.
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
I really do lead quite an austere life outside my flights. No car, no pets, a small flat. No second home. I don’t often eat red meat these days. I recycle quite a lot. I walk everywhere I can (I like living in central London for that reason, in part). I use public transport. I don’t buy much new stuff any more - I have all I want. And so on
The idea red meat is a problem is sheer propaganda.
No, it really is, in several ways
Also it’s bad for you to eat too much red meat. 1-2 times a week is fine. Eat more fish and game
As a population, did we used to eat red meat more than that 50 years ago? Growing up we certainly didn't have meat every day, we couldn't afford it. Hence Sunday Roast was the "big meal" of the week with roast beef.
However, it doesn't give any credit for having 0 children. If you really want to reduce your carbon footprint, then don't produce somone who has their own carbon footprint. Your average eco-warrior saving the planet has a tribe of snot-goblins in tow....
Not having children isn't going to reduce the global population fast enough to meaningfully influence climate change in the next century, but it will exacerbate the demographic crisis.
Yes I’m not at all sure “having no kids” is a definite positive for the future of humanity
If it was we should all have no kids and we’ll solve the climate crisis by going extinct. Great
Line of the day in today's Times, from a profile of Morgan McSweeney, the latest most powerful man you have never heard of;
“He has the sort of restlessness and data-driven mentality you associate with Dominic Cummings, but without the madness,” another adviser to Starmer said.
Doesn’t that imply the rest of the team aren’t “data driven”?
Probably the right number of data driven nerds in the right place in the system. "On tap, not on top" as Churchill said of his boffins.
(As one myself, I'm allowed to say that. We're good at answering questions, but a lot of the art is in knowing the right questions to ask. Sunakism looks like an accurate answer to the wrong question, namely "how can government spending be cut?" It's possible that the wider financialisation of Britain has led to broader right answer/wrong question issues, which is why everything is now expensive and shabby.)
6. International flights have knocked me back this year, under 4 without them.
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
I really do lead quite an austere life outside my flights. No car, no pets, a small flat. No second home. I don’t often eat red meat these days. I recycle quite a lot. I walk everywhere I can (I like living in central London for that reason, in part). I use public transport. I don’t buy much new stuff any more - I have all I want. And so on
Frustrating that it doesn't produce a breakdown. I assume my Aircon is the the main driver for me - I even have a heat pump and solar panels now!
It does give a breakdown. If you go into the “how I can improve” section at the end it will tell you what’s going wrong and provide stats. For me, unsurprisingly, it’s the flying
Sure, but they don't give you a breakdown of household energy use.
It can't go into too much detail because it's only using broad categories and averages. You'd have to actually record the power use of your aircon yourself if you want that level of detail.
I've been keeping track of our diesel use and so I know that we've emitted 1.55 tonnes of CO2 in the last 11 months from driving. I think it's more than 4 tonnes from the coal burnt to heat the house though. That equates to quite a few flights.
It'd be better if Gaza was incorporated into Israel proper and the Palestinians simply made minority citizens of it.
Gaza Strip is a pointless fetid wasteland. A giant hovel.
It doesn't have to be - you can quite rightly argue Hamas have been largely responsible for the destitution and destruction of their own people.
I'd also argue the various economic restrictions placed on Gaza by Israel and Egypt haven't helped.
What's needed, as I argued earlier, and which I think you'd support, is a good old dose of capitalism. Economic investment, ideally from the oil rich Saudi and UAE side but it can come from China or elsewhere. Get the infrastructure repaired, get the buildings repaired, build schools and factories and get people back to school and work.
Invest billions - still cheaper than the endless cycle of death and destruction.
It worked in Northern Ireland and has worked in Iraq - it would work in Gaza.
Yes, open the borders and you might see an initial surge of refugees - take care of them but encourage them to return. It just needs money - there's plenty of it not far away. It would weaken Hamas politically and force them to a less radical and violent path and as a by-product, instead of spending huge parts of their GDP on defence, Israel might be able to start spending on other things.
Russia is clearly behind this. No ally of HAMAS except of Russia has experience of using bomb-dropping drones against modern battle tanks. Only Russia could train HAMAS in this: [Video of drone dropping bomb on Israeli tank]
Huh that has to be a joke right? Israel and Russia have very close diplomatic ties, loads of Russian Jews in Israel, remember start of Ukraine war, Israel were the ones sent to try and negotiate and wouldn't condemn what Russia were doing.
6. International flights have knocked me back this year, under 4 without them.
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
I really do lead quite an austere life outside my flights. No car, no pets, a small flat. No second home. I don’t often eat red meat these days. I recycle quite a lot. I walk everywhere I can (I like living in central London for that reason, in part). I use public transport. I don’t buy much new stuff any more - I have all I want. And so on
The idea red meat is a problem is sheer propaganda.
No, it really is, in several ways
Also it’s bad for you to eat too much red meat. 1-2 times a week is fine. Eat more fish and game
As a population, did we used to eat red meat more than that 50 years ago? Growing up we certainly didn't have meat every day, we couldn't afford it. Hence Sunday Roast was the "big meal" of the week with roast beef.
There're some fairly awful piccies doing the rounds. A morning to avoid Twitter.
Reports of armed Palestinian ganga roaming Israeli towns near Gaza, gunning down everyone they see.
Unfortunately the way they have been treating people it is not surprising. If you keep kicking your dog at some point it will bite back.
True . The Palestinians have been kept in disgusting conditions , effectively a prison camp. Their land being stolen daily to make way for illegal settlements. It’s awful to see this violence but no surprise .
Well, I find it a surprise. Indiscriminate slaughter of civilians? Yes, shocking and surprising.
Killing every Israeli is Hamas' stated goal. That they attempt to do so given an opportunity is not a surprise.
That they got the opportunity *is* a surprise, given the efficiency of Israel's intelligence services and armed forces. It should be a career ending surprise for Netanyahu and his government. Which is why we should again not be surprised to see something similar done in Gaza when (and unless Hamas has been armed to a very high standard in secret, I am pretty sure it will be when) the IDF move in.
For all the faults of the political leadership, the IDF is a modern, well trained and disciplined military force.
Yes they will have no hesitation about collateral damage, including civilian casualties, if they believe that the military objective is significant enough.
But I don’t think you can equate that to “indiscriminate slaughter” in the way we have seen with today’s outrage
Bluntly, I except to see the Israeli government at least attempt the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.
That may involve driving people away, rather than shooting them. I suppose from that point of view it is not strictly equivalent.
In light of Hizbollah's statement I wonder if we might see an Israeli attack on Lebanon as well.
Hizbollah was always going to attack. This has been planned from the beginning. If you think otherwise you are very naive my friend
6. International flights have knocked me back this year, under 4 without them.
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
I really do lead quite an austere life outside my flights. No car, no pets, a small flat. No second home. I don’t often eat red meat these days. I recycle quite a lot. I walk everywhere I can (I like living in central London for that reason, in part). I use public transport. I don’t buy much new stuff any more - I have all I want. And so on
The idea red meat is a problem is sheer propaganda.
Russia is clearly behind this. No ally of HAMAS except of Russia has experience of using bomb-dropping drones against modern battle tanks. Only Russia could train HAMAS in this: [Video of drone dropping bomb on Israeli tank]
I'd buy an electric car right now if (a) they were £30k not £65k for a family car and (b) there were way more charging points available.
Consumers are being rational, and only the very wealthy (money and time) can do it at present.
Yes. This is how the adoption of all new technologies has progressed. There are early adopters, and everyone else follows behind when it is cheaper, easier and better.
There're some fairly awful piccies doing the rounds. A morning to avoid Twitter.
Reports of armed Palestinian ganga roaming Israeli towns near Gaza, gunning down everyone they see.
Unfortunately the way they have been treating people it is not surprising. If you keep kicking your dog at some point it will bite back.
True . The Palestinians have been kept in disgusting conditions , effectively a prison camp. Their land being stolen daily to make way for illegal settlements. It’s awful to see this violence but no surprise .
Well, I find it a surprise. Indiscriminate slaughter of civilians? Yes, shocking and surprising.
Killing every Israeli is Hamas' stated goal. That they attempt to do so given an opportunity is not a surprise.
That they got the opportunity *is* a surprise, given the efficiency of Israel's intelligence services and armed forces. It should be a career ending surprise for Netanyahu and his government. Which is why we should again not be surprised to see something similar done in Gaza when (and unless Hamas has been armed to a very high standard in secret, I am pretty sure it will be when) the IDF move in.
For all the faults of the political leadership, the IDF is a modern, well trained and disciplined military force.
Yes they will have no hesitation about collateral damage, including civilian casualties, if they believe that the military objective is significant enough.
But I don’t think you can equate that to “indiscriminate slaughter” in the way we have seen with today’s outrage
Bluntly, I except to see the Israeli government at least attempt the ethnic cleansing of Gaza.
That may involve driving people away, rather than shooting them. I suppose from that point of view it is not strictly equivalent.
In light of Hizbollah's statement I wonder if we might see an Israeli attack on Lebanon as well.
Hizbollah was always going to attack. This has been planned from the beginning. If you think otherwise you are very naive my friend
Indeed? How do you know? What information are you privy to that Mossad clearly isn't?
If Hizbollah were to attack I would have thought they would refrain from telegraphing their intentions. The dream for them would be the entire IDF in the south and the northern border lightly held. Hardly like to happen now, is it?
Comments
This 'war' is horrible to consider and is likely to dominate the media for a long time
Do you feel lucky punk and do you think the general public will feel you’ve been hard done by?
How on earth have Mossad and the Shin Bet between them not picked up on something this big?
Except the extension of the Nottingham Tram system to Clifton South was completed in 2015.
Is this because Gilt rates are returning to long term historic norms? I could see that being true for funded schemes, but it is less obvious that it should apply to schemes without a ring fenced pot. Any Actuary on here able to comment?
If genuine as a revaluation then it may be that government finances are better than they appear for the long term, provided government keeps borrowing down.
Turns out I’m a “climate consumer”, which is one down from a “climate villain”. 8.8 tons
My flights are the big deal (of course) but my otherwise modest lifestyle saves me from villainy
https://climatehero.me
Have a go. It’s interesting
The other thing to bear in mind is the protests there have been in Iran. The government could well fancy a distraction. Would they even welcome an Israeli attack?
Yes they will have no hesitation about collateral damage, including civilian casualties, if they believe that the military objective is significant enough.
But I don’t think you can equate that to “indiscriminate slaughter” in the way we have seen with today’s outrage
Hezbollah has released a statement claiming that they are in Direct Contact with Hamas as well as other Palestinian Factions in the Gaza Strip and that they are Warning Israel to be Careful with what their next Actions.
https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1710580276370260046?s=20
The indiscriminate targeting of civilians suggests that the intent is to provoke a response from Israel that includes indiscriminate killing of Palestinian civilians. The objectives that make sense would be to either force other Arab states to reverse steps to normalising relations with Israel, to stir up opposition among the population of those Arab states that don't do so, or to provide a pretext for a wider military conflict with Israel, perhaps involving Hezbollah and Iranian forces in Syria.
The ultimate target for this might well be Saudi Arabia, with which Iran has been in a proxy war for some years in Yemen, and has sent drones to attack oil facilities in Saudi Arabia.
---
"Citizens of Israel. We are at war, not an operation, not an escalation, a war.
"This morning Hamas launched a murderous surprise attack against the state of Israel and its citizens. We've been at it since early morning.
"I convened the heads of the security system, first of all I instructed to cleanse the settlements of the terrorists who had infiltrated - this operation is being carried out during these hours.
"At the same time, I ordered an extensive reserve mobilization and a retaliatory war with a strength and scope that the enemy had never known.
"The enemy will pay a price he has never known. In the meantime, I call on all citizens of Israel to strictly obey the instructions of the army and the instructions of the Home Command.
"We are in a war and we will win it.'
---
Israel has an absolute right to defend itself.
We're in contact with Israeli authorities, and British nationals in Israel should follow travel advice.*
https://twitter.com/RishiSunak/status/1710583360756625872
*Still current at: 7 October 2023
Updated: 12 July 2023
https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/israel
If you recall the "Strand" ad campaign was one of product failure as the Strand smoker was viewed as a Billy no mates character. Also he and the ad were not "cool" and the product failed.
That may involve driving people away, rather than shooting them. I suppose from that point of view it is not strictly equivalent.
In light of Hizbollah's statement I wonder if we might see an Israeli attack on Lebanon as well.
Requirements. Poorly laid down, and then incessantly meddled with.
Coupled with implausible forecasts on cost and time (sensible ones are produced and rejected at some point in the chain - either before the decision-makers (they'll never endorse this!) or by the decision-makers (that's not acceptable! Try harder!).
But it almost always comes back to the requirements. Get those right and stick to them and all of a sudden, things get delivered. Make them fuzzy, unrealistic, immeasurable, and then flail around with them repeatedly, and then change over your management team again and again as people walk out in despair or are burned out or are moved on because they either didn't hit impossible targets or resisted yet another change in scope, and you end up in a perpetual crisis where progress inches forwards (assuming the direction in which you're being pushed right now can be described as "forwards" for the overall project), or stalls completely while costs balloon.
https://x.com/manniefabian/status/1710585474354413659?s=20
I didn’t realise how important your energy source is
This means that you are a Climate Friend!"
I'm simply thrilled.
Part of the problem is the great crested newt people try… and lose. Then the pollution people have a go… then the noise people… and did anyone think of the children?
Each time you have court delays and fact finding, etc etc
If you just said this is the date - use it or lose it - then that would, I think, be a reasonable compromise between protecting people’s rights and expediting the process
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2023/08/13/rishi-sunaks-chopper-is-going-to-get-him-into-a-lot-of-trouble/
and
https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2023/08/26/rishi-the-grate/
Slightly baffled by how Leon has such a low one...
Maybe I am reading the guy all wrong.
And the political environment today is different than for most of the last 2000 years. The issue of the “right of return” is that land is occupied by people who have bought it in good faith.
Essentially the Palestinian leadership is not saying “let us come back”. They are saying “I want Grandpa Joe’s house back and you need to kick out the current residents”.
Israel has offered monetary compensation at current market values - a huge amount of money - but it was flat out rejected.
The issue is that the Palestinian demand makes Israel non-viable as a state. But “let us go back to our homes” sounds very reasonable in a western newspaper headline
So her immediately popping up here seems to me to be your typical opportunist politician, they care about feck all other than themselves but try to make out they actually care about the great unwashed. It could have been anyone , she just got in early, we will be hearing crap all day from politician's wringing their hands and doing nothing as usual.
I find it pretty difficult to believe he even knew about it and failed to prevent it, which is the other conspiracy theory that will be put forward.
Not, as I said upthread, that I think he cares much about civilian casualties but it's enormously damaging to his government's credibility. He returned to power promising better security for Israel, FFS.
However, it doesn't give any credit for having 0 children. If you really want to reduce your carbon footprint, then don't produce somone who has their own carbon footprint. Your average eco-warrior saving the planet has a tribe of snot-goblins in tow....
All of these things will hopefully be different in a few years time once we have our own place, and the in-laws might be persuaded to avail of some government grants to upgrade their heating and insulation.
https://x.com/yarotrof/status/1710570447321047491?s=20
Video of Gaza journalist in Israeli kibbutz (non graphic)
Israel launches airstrikes on Gaza Strip and calls up reservists after Palestinian gunmen infiltrate its territory
https://x.com/BBCBreaking/status/1710569576948265122?s=20
Seeking to justify attacks on civilians is disgusting.
You should be ashamed of yourself
It'd be better if Gaza was incorporated into Israel proper and the Palestinians simply made minority citizens of it.
Gaza Strip is a pointless fetid wasteland. A giant hovel.
Hamas is attacking civilians because (a) they want to cause terror; and (b) they want to exterminate all Hews
Israel attacks military targets. They are much more tolerant of civilian casualties than we would be. The excessive loss of life and damage is rightly condemned.
But they are not equivalent to each other
If it was we should all have no kids and we’ll solve the climate crisis by going extinct. Great
Consumers are being rational, and only the very wealthy (money and time) can do it at present.
Also it’s bad for you to eat too much red meat. 1-2 times a week is fine. Eat more fish and game
Well to start with their population density is a hell of a lot less than ours.
When they built the TGV Med in the early 2000s they needed to buy 285 properties over a distance of 406km of track. Less than 1 property per km. (actually 0.7)
Up until they were cancelled the second two phases of HS2 had bought almost 1000 properties over a distance of 142km of track. 7 properties per km. That is 10 times as many properties per km.
The other point is that the actual decision making on the route is far more devolved in France. There are 4 stages.
The Central Government decides the main trends and route options, by publishing a strategic scheme of the new infrastructure projects.
On a regional scale, preliminary studies isolate a study zone 10km to 20km wide, in cooperation with the regional elected representatives. Then this study zone is to a zone 1km wide.
On a local scale, the APS (Avant-Projet Sommaire or Preliminary Draft) is established in collaboration with the mayors concerned with the various alternatives within 1km zone.
A public enquiry is then held where the local population can decide on where, within that 300m perimieter the actual lie should run (within the technical constraints set out to make the whole thing work).
Hopefully it's a fancy new sidearm or something.
https://x.com/sumlenny/status/1710592188415975760?s=20
The French build up. We build sideways.
(As one myself, I'm allowed to say that. We're good at answering questions, but a lot of the art is in knowing the right questions to ask. Sunakism looks like an accurate answer to the wrong question, namely "how can government spending be cut?" It's possible that the wider financialisation of Britain has led to broader right answer/wrong question issues, which is why everything is now expensive and shabby.)
I've been keeping track of our diesel use and so I know that we've emitted 1.55 tonnes of CO2 in the last 11 months from driving. I think it's more than 4 tonnes from the coal burnt to heat the house though. That equates to quite a few flights.
I'd also argue the various economic restrictions placed on Gaza by Israel and Egypt haven't helped.
What's needed, as I argued earlier, and which I think you'd support, is a good old dose of capitalism. Economic investment, ideally from the oil rich Saudi and UAE side but it can come from China or elsewhere. Get the infrastructure repaired, get the buildings repaired, build schools and factories and get people back to school and work.
Invest billions - still cheaper than the endless cycle of death and destruction.
It worked in Northern Ireland and has worked in Iraq - it would work in Gaza.
Yes, open the borders and you might see an initial surge of refugees - take care of them but encourage them to return. It just needs money - there's plenty of it not far away. It would weaken Hamas politically and force them to a less radical and violent path and as a by-product, instead of spending huge parts of their GDP on defence, Israel might be able to start spending on other things.
Iran is the obvious backer of these things.
A ridiculous theory
If Hizbollah were to attack I would have thought they would refrain from telegraphing their intentions. The dream for them would be the entire IDF in the south and the northern border lightly held. Hardly like to happen now, is it?