Howdy, Stranger!

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

Can Cameron make Sunak’s election challenge any easier – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,167
edited November 2023 in General
imageCan Cameron make Sunak’s election challenge any easier – politicalbetting.com

Ever since Cameron stopped being PM after the UK voted for Brexit there have been a series of stories about how he has been earning a living. I have always ignored such reporting but it could be relevant now given his return to the political stage.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • The public wanted Suella sacked.

    Sunak obliged.

    But I wonder if he'll get as much credit for doing so as he might have? The papers today are understandably full of Lord Cameron's resurrection...
  • And what's in this for Cameron? Foreign Secretary for a year, then an opposition peer for a bit... I can't see a new Tory leader giving him a front-bench role post-GE24 (or GE25), and surely a role in Government post-GE29 (if the Tories win) is pretty unlikely.

    He can't be too content with whatever he's doing at the moment if he's happy to jack it all in for such a comparatively paltry return...
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,126

    And what's in this for Cameron? Foreign Secretary for a year, then an opposition peer for a bit... I can't see a new Tory leader giving him a front-bench role post-GE24 (or GE25), and surely a role in Government post-GE29 (if the Tories win) is pretty unlikely.

    He can't be too content with whatever he's doing at the moment if he's happy to jack it all in for such a comparatively paltry return...

    A complete updating of his list of person contacts among foreign power players? Well worth it.
  • So you reckon he's angling for a Blair-style peace envoy type of role then? Can't see it personally. But then my experience of trying to find meaningful employment after having served as Prime Minister is somewhat limited!
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,126
    No, Cameron cannot really help.

    Foreign affairs are not the major problem facing the government, perception wise, and won't change the fundamental issues of economic malaise, policy failures, and the weight of 14 years in office.

    If there's a big shift to a more Cameronesque tone and approach maybe it'll help a bit, but there's leakage on the right and I'm not sure they can sustain that in a desperate last stand.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,126
    The US Supreme Court can be pretty funny. They've adopted a Code of Conduct, the details of which I've not read yet, but their statement on it is so defensive, basically pretending the lack of any Code was meaningless and they totally followed the principles of the new Code anyway, they promise.
    https://nitter.net/SawyerHackett/status/1724149557007618513#m

    Amusingly their description that although unstated until now it represents codifiction of principles they've long regarded as governing their conduct is how they tend to operate - make something up and insist it was the case all along.
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,084
    Good morning. Lord Cameron is very unpopular nowadays with the general public.

    And, yes, Greenshill is going to haunt him and Sunak. This is not a scandal that either he, or Sunak, will be allowed to ignore. Not just because Labour won’t let them but because the Serious Fraud Office are still investigating as are other agencies, including the German Government.

    https://news.sky.com/story/camerons-greensill-connection-risks-haunting-ex-pms-return-to-government-13007212

    https://www.bbc.com/news/business-67401551

    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/nov/13/greensill-scandal-david-cameron-cabinet

    It’s a very murky affair. ‘Sleaze' doesn’t really do it justice.

  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,750
    David Tennant back in the Tardis. David Cameron back in the government.

    Things always come in threes. Whatever next?
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,750
    But seriously.

    "No doubt Labour is digging furiously to find if there are any negatives that would undermine him and of course the PM."

    Is there any need to dig? On the podcast, Campbell had a list immediately (and Stewart was scathing about Cameron's history in foreign affairs).
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192
    kle4 said:

    The US Supreme Court can be pretty funny. They've adopted a Code of Conduct, the details of which I've not read yet, but their statement on it is so defensive, basically pretending the lack of any Code was meaningless and they totally followed the principles of the new Code anyway, they promise.
    https://nitter.net/SawyerHackett/status/1724149557007618513#m

    Amusingly their description that although unstated until now it represents codifiction of principles they've long regarded as governing their conduct is how they tend to operate - make something up and insist it was the case all along.

    And they remain the only arbiters of their own conduct, so it's largely meaningless.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,232
    As someone who may well never vote Tory, it’s a slight net positive (Greensill somehow seems relatively benign compared to the rest of what this government is up to).

    But then I’m not the target market, am I? As many others have said, deckchairs and the Titanic comes to mind.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672
    Chris said:

    But seriously.

    "No doubt Labour is digging furiously to find if there are any negatives that would undermine him and of course the PM."

    Is there any need to dig? On the podcast, Campbell had a list immediately (and Stewart was scathing about Cameron's history in foreign affairs).

    Do you honestly expect someone as nasty and devious as Campbell to support someone he sees as an 'enemy'? He's a rabid attack dog.

    The guy should just bow out of the public eye, given what he did. And I mean Campbell, not Cameron.
  • Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,883
    edited November 2023
    Chris said:

    David Tennant back in the Tardis. David Cameron back in the government.

    Things always come in threes. Whatever next?

    Daveyboy1961 wins the lottery?...

    ...I suppose I would have to start playing it first?...
  • BartholomewRobertsBartholomewRoberts Posts: 22,098
    edited November 2023
    Chris said:

    David Tennant back in the Tardis. David Cameron back in the government.

    Things always come in threes. Whatever next?

    The Queen back in Buckingham Palace.

    We've had the pandemic, but we've not had the zombie apocalypse yet.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,750

    Chris said:

    But seriously.

    "No doubt Labour is digging furiously to find if there are any negatives that would undermine him and of course the PM."

    Is there any need to dig? On the podcast, Campbell had a list immediately (and Stewart was scathing about Cameron's history in foreign affairs).

    Do you honestly expect someone as nasty and devious as Campbell to support someone he sees as an 'enemy'? He's a rabid attack dog.

    The guy should just bow out of the public eye, given what he did. And I mean Campbell, not Cameron.
    Obviously the point is that there's no shortage of attack targets in clear view.

    I do agree it seems a bit unfair for the Tories to be criticised by nasty, devious people when they are so nice and straightforward themselves, though.
  • On topic, well it certainly can't hurt it - and Cameron is a massive upgrade compared to having Braverman in the cabinet.

    Given many of our PMs in recent decades were on the younger side too, its good to see Cameron offering his expertise in what many would now consider a 'lesser' role but is still a Great Office. Historically former PMs were more willing to stick around and help, and I think that's no bad thing.

    But on an electoral basis? That die is probably cast already. Might help save some constituencies though on the margins.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,750

    Chris said:

    David Tennant back in the Tardis. David Cameron back in the government.

    Things always come in threes. Whatever next?

    The Queen back in Buckingham Palace.

    We've had the pandemic, but we've not had the zombie apocalypse yet.
    I think the third one is likely to involve another David.

    Possibly a university chair in Sports Science for David Beckham?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672
    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    David Tennant back in the Tardis. David Cameron back in the government.

    Things always come in threes. Whatever next?

    The Queen back in Buckingham Palace.

    We've had the pandemic, but we've not had the zombie apocalypse yet.
    I think the third one is likely to involve another David.

    Possibly a university chair in Sports Science for David Beckham?
    David Davis to resign an call a by-election on a matter of petulant self-indulgence?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672
    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    But seriously.

    "No doubt Labour is digging furiously to find if there are any negatives that would undermine him and of course the PM."

    Is there any need to dig? On the podcast, Campbell had a list immediately (and Stewart was scathing about Cameron's history in foreign affairs).

    Do you honestly expect someone as nasty and devious as Campbell to support someone he sees as an 'enemy'? He's a rabid attack dog.

    The guy should just bow out of the public eye, given what he did. And I mean Campbell, not Cameron.
    Obviously the point is that there's no shortage of attack targets in clear view.

    I do agree it seems a bit unfair for the Tories to be criticised by nasty, devious people when they are so nice and straightforward themselves, though.
    No. Campbell is a truly odious character. It's bad that he's now somehow seen as a mature voice on anything, as he's malignant.

    He'd be better off spending a few years listing the things he's done wrong, and the lives he's ruined, rather than listing those of other people.
  • Chris said:

    Chris said:

    David Tennant back in the Tardis. David Cameron back in the government.

    Things always come in threes. Whatever next?

    The Queen back in Buckingham Palace.

    We've had the pandemic, but we've not had the zombie apocalypse yet.
    I think the third one is likely to involve another David.

    Possibly a university chair in Sports Science for David Beckham?
    Perhaps with the Glazers and Ratcliffe, Manchester United could go for the shock move of bringing David Seaman in as their new keeper.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,281
    kle4 said:

    No, Cameron cannot really help.

    Foreign affairs are not the major problem facing the government, perception wise, and won't change the fundamental issues of economic malaise, policy failures, and the weight of 14 years in office.

    If there's a big shift to a more Cameronesque tone and approach maybe it'll help a bit, but there's leakage on the right and I'm not sure they can sustain that in a desperate last stand.

    This is just a signal that the Tories are not lurching to the right.

    It won’t change the outcome of the election materially but it is about long term positioning

  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672
    103 seconds of Corbyn refusing to say whether Hamas are a terrorist group.

    https://twitter.com/KyleWOrton/status/1724174270438257142
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672
    I think it may save them a couple of seats, if he gets some prominence. But that's all. It's a slight indication that the Conservatives may not shift more to the weirdo right.

    The fact the Labour attack dogs are going for him so strongly, shows they think he is a threat.
  • 103 seconds of Corbyn refusing to say whether Hamas are a terrorist group.

    https://twitter.com/KyleWOrton/status/1724174270438257142

    Is proterroristor a word yet?
  • HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,084
    edited November 2023
    Chris said:

    But seriously.

    "No doubt Labour is digging furiously to find if there are any negatives that would undermine him and of course the PM."

    Is there any need to dig? On the podcast, Campbell had a list immediately (and Stewart was scathing about Cameron's history in foreign affairs).

    Yep there’s no need to dig.

    Greenshill stinks.

    It is WELL worth reading Suzanne Heywood’s ‘What Does Jeremy Think?’. In fact, I’d urge everyone on here to read it if they haven’t already done so. Although Suzanne is careful, Cameron comes out of it smelling like excrement.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Does-Jeremy-Think-Heywood-ebook/dp/B081ZJCJ3M

    p.s. It’s difficult to see how anyone posting on here about the politics of the last 25 years in this country can do so without having read this book.
  • Hmmm not sure what to make of the Cameron reboot. Undoubtedly he has baggage. But, likely to have more heft on the international scene - and bringing him in reduced the amount of reshuffling the Prime Minister had to do (albeit at the expense of snubbing the rest of Conservative Party in Parliament).

    I was thinking about when Gordon Brown brought Peter Mandleson back into Government as first lord of everything (or whatever title he gave him). That was a bold move that did move the needle. It also showed that Brown was fighting to stay in Number 10, and was willing to bury hatchets to do so. Mandleson was not well liked and brought, arguably more, baggage than Cameron.

    Can Cameron do the same? I am not so sure. Firstly his job is Foreign Secretary so absent a concerted effort will have no need to get involved in domestic politics. He also will be out of the country a fair bit, he won’t be chairing daily strategy sessions. Finally, I am not sure he has the “dark arts” skills that Mandleson has. Osborne on the other hand.
  • maxhmaxh Posts: 1,232

    103 seconds of Corbyn refusing to say whether Hamas are a terrorist group.

    https://twitter.com/KyleWOrton/status/1724174270438257142

    I’d take something rather different from that clip: it was clearly the end of a longer interview by which point Corbyn’s temper had got the better of him and he was obstinately trying to make a different point about Piers Morgan and his interview style.

    Neither man came out of it well, but I don’t think Corbyn’s answer to the question Morgan was asking can be inferred from it, unless your views on Corbyn are already set.
  • Heathener said:

    Chris said:

    But seriously.

    "No doubt Labour is digging furiously to find if there are any negatives that would undermine him and of course the PM."

    Is there any need to dig? On the podcast, Campbell had a list immediately (and Stewart was scathing about Cameron's history in foreign affairs).

    Yep there’s no need to dig.

    Greenshill stinks.

    It is WELL worth reading Suzanne Heywood’s ‘What Does Jeremy Think?’. In fact, I’d urge everyone on here to read it if they haven’t already done so. Although Suzanne is careful, Cameron comes out of it smelling like excrement.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Does-Jeremy-Think-Heywood-ebook/dp/B081ZJCJ3M

    p.s. It’s difficult to see how anyone posting on here about the politics of the last 25 years in this country can do so without having read this book.
    Speaking of Labour attack dogs. Morning Heathener, hope you're well.
  • Peter_the_PunterPeter_the_Punter Posts: 14,345
    edited November 2023

    I think it may save them a couple of seats, if he gets some prominence. But that's all. It's a slight indication that the Conservatives may not shift more to the weirdo right.

    The fact the Labour attack dogs are going for him so strongly, shows they think he is a threat.

    Yes, that's about it, JJ. Maybe a dozen seats, I would say - partly because he is a figure of substance (as opposed to, say, Silly Suella) and partly because it indicates an edging away from the right towards the more defensible centre ground.

    Labour will take him seriously, but the outcome of the next GE looks as nailed on as ever. Tories to lose about 150 seats is what I am predicting now.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    edited November 2023
    Chris said:

    David Tennant back in the Tardis. David Cameron back in the government.

    Things always come in threes. Whatever next?

    Hinds back at the DfE.

    That's possibly good news. He was a reasonable Secretary of State under May, although not quite as good as Greening (who was the only really good one of the last 20 years) and he understands educational matters in a way Gove, Gibb, Cummings, Freedman, Spielman, Acland-Hood, Wormald don't (because they have never tried to).

    Unfortunately a lot of the good work he did in reining in the decidedly unholy bargain between OFSTED, the DfE and academy chains to force all schools to academise has been undone, and has led both to a cratering of governance standards in schools and more publicly to Ruth Perry's suicide. It's hard to see with that idiot Keegan still in overall charge how he'll be able to repair the appalling damage, but there's always a faint hope he'll at least know the problems are and be willing to call them out.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421
    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.
  • The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,281
    Heathener said:

    Chris said:

    But seriously.

    "No doubt Labour is digging furiously to find if there are any negatives that would undermine him and of course the PM."

    Is there any need to dig? On the podcast, Campbell had a list immediately (and Stewart was scathing about Cameron's history in foreign affairs).

    Yep there’s no need to dig.

    Greenshill stinks.

    It is WELL worth reading Suzanne Heywood’s ‘What Does Jeremy Think?’. In fact, I’d urge everyone on here to read it if they haven’t already done so. Although Suzanne is careful, Cameron comes out of it smelling like excrement.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Does-Jeremy-Think-Heywood-ebook/dp/B081ZJCJ3M

    p.s. It’s difficult to see how anyone posting on here about the politics of the last 25 years in this country can do so without having read this book.
    Greensill stinks

    Cameron was naive and greedy, and taken in by Jeremy Heywood’s reference. He made a fool of himself and perhaps tried to leverage contacts a little hard.

    But at the heart of it, he was taken in by a smooth talking shyster.

    So it was bad judgement rather than corruption.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428
    edited November 2023
    Morning

    Up early with stuff to do

    I repeat my analogy from yesterday. Sunak has sacked the sad trombonist on the Titanic. And replaced it with a robot elephant playing moog synthesiser. For a few moments the strangeness might divert and amuse…..

    But the ship is still definitely sinking, and the band is now actually worse
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428
    maxh said:

    103 seconds of Corbyn refusing to say whether Hamas are a terrorist group.

    https://twitter.com/KyleWOrton/status/1724174270438257142

    I’d take something rather different from that clip: it was clearly the end of a longer interview by which point Corbyn’s temper had got the better of him and he was obstinately trying to make a different point about Piers Morgan and his interview style.

    Neither man came out of it well, but I don’t think Corbyn’s answer to the question Morgan was asking can be inferred from it, unless your views on Corbyn are already set.
    Except that all he had to do was say Yes, Hamas is a terror group, and the line of questioning would end

    Red Len next to him had no troubie saying it - in that same clip
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672
    maxh said:

    103 seconds of Corbyn refusing to say whether Hamas are a terrorist group.

    https://twitter.com/KyleWOrton/status/1724174270438257142

    I’d take something rather different from that clip: it was clearly the end of a longer interview by which point Corbyn’s temper had got the better of him and he was obstinately trying to make a different point about Piers Morgan and his interview style.

    Neither man came out of it well, but I don’t think Corbyn’s answer to the question Morgan was asking can be inferred from it, unless your views on Corbyn are already set.
    Really?

    I mean, really? That's what you get from that? A simple question, with a simple yes/no answer. Avoiding answering makes it quite clear what he thinks.

    It's such a simple question, so I'll ask it of you: do you consider Hamas a terrorist group? Yes or no?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    edited November 2023

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410
    Rumours of a freeze in working age benefits.
  • maxh said:

    103 seconds of Corbyn refusing to say whether Hamas are a terrorist group.

    https://twitter.com/KyleWOrton/status/1724174270438257142

    I’d take something rather different from that clip: it was clearly the end of a longer interview by which point Corbyn’s temper had got the better of him and he was obstinately trying to make a different point about Piers Morgan and his interview style.

    Neither man came out of it well, but I don’t think Corbyn’s answer to the question Morgan was asking can be inferred from it, unless your views on Corbyn are already set.
    Really?

    I mean, really? That's what you get from that? A simple question, with a simple yes/no answer. Avoiding answering makes it quite clear what he thinks.

    It's such a simple question, so I'll ask it of you: do you consider Hamas a terrorist group? Yes or no?
    Of course not. A terrorist group with a territory is a country.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,421

    Heathener said:

    Chris said:

    But seriously.

    "No doubt Labour is digging furiously to find if there are any negatives that would undermine him and of course the PM."

    Is there any need to dig? On the podcast, Campbell had a list immediately (and Stewart was scathing about Cameron's history in foreign affairs).

    Yep there’s no need to dig.

    Greenshill stinks.

    It is WELL worth reading Suzanne Heywood’s ‘What Does Jeremy Think?’. In fact, I’d urge everyone on here to read it if they haven’t already done so. Although Suzanne is careful, Cameron comes out of it smelling like excrement.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Does-Jeremy-Think-Heywood-ebook/dp/B081ZJCJ3M

    p.s. It’s difficult to see how anyone posting on here about the politics of the last 25 years in this country can do so without having read this book.
    Greensill stinks

    Cameron was naive and greedy, and taken in by Jeremy Heywood’s reference. He made a fool of himself and perhaps tried to leverage contacts a little hard.

    But at the heart of it, he was taken in by a smooth talking shyster.

    So it was bad judgement rather than corruption.

    It's just as well then that as Foreign Secretary he will never need to make careful judgements of either people or projects.
  • dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 29,410
    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    To make it obvious none of the others have any?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672

    maxh said:

    103 seconds of Corbyn refusing to say whether Hamas are a terrorist group.

    https://twitter.com/KyleWOrton/status/1724174270438257142

    I’d take something rather different from that clip: it was clearly the end of a longer interview by which point Corbyn’s temper had got the better of him and he was obstinately trying to make a different point about Piers Morgan and his interview style.

    Neither man came out of it well, but I don’t think Corbyn’s answer to the question Morgan was asking can be inferred from it, unless your views on Corbyn are already set.
    Really?

    I mean, really? That's what you get from that? A simple question, with a simple yes/no answer. Avoiding answering makes it quite clear what he thinks.

    It's such a simple question, so I'll ask it of you: do you consider Hamas a terrorist group? Yes or no?
    Of course not. A terrorist group with a territory is a country.
    That's a good and acceptable answer. But I'd argue that it's not quite true: it's possible for a group to run a country and also be terrorists abroad - especially if they do not declare war first before the attack. And that then leads us on to the definition of 'terrorist'...

    As a counter-example, at one stage ISIS controlled a vast territory. Were they suddenly a country, and not 'terrorists'?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192
    Heathener said:

    Chris said:

    But seriously.

    "No doubt Labour is digging furiously to find if there are any negatives that would undermine him and of course the PM."

    Is there any need to dig? On the podcast, Campbell had a list immediately (and Stewart was scathing about Cameron's history in foreign affairs).

    Yep there’s no need to dig.

    Greenshill stinks.

    It is WELL worth reading Suzanne Heywood’s ‘What Does Jeremy Think?’. In fact, I’d urge everyone on here to read it if they haven’t already done so. Although Suzanne is careful, Cameron comes out of it smelling like excrement.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Does-Jeremy-Think-Heywood-ebook/dp/B081ZJCJ3M

    p.s. It’s difficult to see how anyone posting on here about the politics of the last 25 years in this country can do so without having read this book.
    No it's not.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,750
    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    "Common Sense" often seems to describe a certain set of right-wing opinions, in the absence of any rational arguments to justify them.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    dixiedean said:

    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    To make it obvious none of the others have any?
    Jeremy Hunt did. His book on patient safety is quite perceptive and detailed.

    None of the 5 (or 6 if you count Barclay twice) Health Secretaries since have cared much.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    "Common Sense" often seems to describe a certain set of right-wing opinions, in the absence of any rational arguments to justify them.
    I agree, but what does the job actually entail? Is there any brief to actually do anything?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672
    edited November 2023
    Forty workers trapped in India after a tunnel collapses.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-67411822

    It'd be interesting to know more details on this after they (hopefully!) rescue the men. Was it bad tunnel design/construction, or just bad luck that a landslide occurred whilst it was under construction, when tunnels are at their weakest? The pictures from the interior of the tunnel seem slightly odd from a construction POV, but I'm not an expert.

    (Though I'd argue the construction system should be designed to cope with likely events such as landslides...)

    Edit: this report from the Indy indicates health and safety might not have been quite as stringent as we might hope:
    "“Just a day before, when we were removing a lattice girder, we saw some debris falling. On Saturday night, a piece of concrete fell from the roof. We informed our seniors. But before they could do anything, the incident happened,” he added. The National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (NHIDCL) is the agency engaged in building the tunnel."

    If you have concrete falling from the roof, I might argue you get the workers further down the tunnel out...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192
    .
    ydoethur said:

    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.

    Interesting that Sunak had decided to replace her well before the article, having already set in train the Cameron recruitment.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192
    .
    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    "Common Sense" often seems to describe a certain set of right-wing opinions, in the absence of any rational arguments to justify them.
    Thomas Paine, that well known right winger...
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413
    Nigelb said:

    .

    ydoethur said:

    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.

    Interesting that Sunak had decided to replace her well before the article, having already set in train the Cameron recruitment.
    I agree. I suspect they had a bust up a while back. She then went more progressively out on a limb to embarrass him and he lined up a successor . Neither was shocked at the sacking.
  • Chris said:

    David Tennant back in the Tardis. David Cameron back in the government.

    Things always come in threes. Whatever next?

    David Icke.
  • Foxy said:

    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    "Common Sense" often seems to describe a certain set of right-wing opinions, in the absence of any rational arguments to justify them.
    I agree, but what does the job actually entail? Is there any brief to actually do anything?
    Isn't it the bog standard Minister Without Portfolio For Tricky Interviews?

    Odd that the key "talking not doing" roles (McVey, Holden, is Anderson still there?) have gone to Red Wall types.
  • Good morning, everyone.

    F1: apparently the Las Vegas race, starting around 10pm locally, will be 5-10 degrees Celsius. I wonder if that means Haas might be value, as overworking tyres, in such temperatures, might be advantageous.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428
    There’s really no dispute over Corbyn’s sympathies

    “This seems a good day to remind everyone that Corbyn's trip to Tunisia, to lay a wreath on the grave of Munich Massacre planner Salah Khalaf, was paid for by the Council for European Palestinian Relations, the European arm of Hamas.”

    https://x.com/barnyskinner/status/1724325162516890076?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    Nigelb said:

    .

    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    "Common Sense" often seems to describe a certain set of right-wing opinions, in the absence of any rational arguments to justify them.
    Thomas Paine, that well known right winger...
    Both Common Sense and The Rights of Man were phenomenally popular works, and still highly relevant today. A truly great political thinker.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192

    Nigelb said:

    .

    ydoethur said:

    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.

    Interesting that Sunak had decided to replace her well before the article, having already set in train the Cameron recruitment.
    I agree. I suspect they had a bust up a while back. She then went more progressively out on a limb to embarrass him and he lined up a successor . Neither was shocked at the sacking.
    It does make him look marginally more decisive than he was being given credit for last week.

    It will be interesting to see how much of a role Cameron is given outside if his direct brief. I am guessing his appointment signals a deliberate change in the political complexion of Sunak's government.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706

    Chris said:

    David Tennant back in the Tardis. David Cameron back in the government.

    Things always come in threes. Whatever next?

    David Icke.
    Minister for Alien Defences?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192

    Foxy said:

    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    "Common Sense" often seems to describe a certain set of right-wing opinions, in the absence of any rational arguments to justify them.
    I agree, but what does the job actually entail? Is there any brief to actually do anything?
    Isn't it the bog standard Minister Without Portfolio For Tricky Interviews?

    Odd that the key "talking not doing" roles (McVey, Holden, is Anderson still there?) have gone to Red Wall types.
    Or the just picked the gobbiest candidates.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192
    edited November 2023
    Deleted
  • GhedebravGhedebrav Posts: 3,860
    ydoethur said:

    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.

    Reminds me of the of one of the great John Cooper Clark’s works

    “What kind of creature bore you - was it some kind of bat?
    They can’t find a good word for you, but I can: ‘tw*t”
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192
    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    "Common Sense" often seems to describe a certain set of right-wing opinions, in the absence of any rational arguments to justify them.
    Thomas Paine, that well known right winger...
    Both Common Sense and The Rights of Man were phenomenally popular works, and still highly relevant today. A truly great political thinker.
    Sunakian irony then ?
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706
    edited November 2023

    Foxy said:

    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    "Common Sense" often seems to describe a certain set of right-wing opinions, in the absence of any rational arguments to justify them.
    I agree, but what does the job actually entail? Is there any brief to actually do anything?
    Isn't it the bog standard Minister Without Portfolio For Tricky Interviews?

    Odd that the key "talking not doing" roles (McVey, Holden, is Anderson still there?) have gone to Red Wall types.
    Yes, the David Cameron appointment is a bit of a sinecure. Foreign policy doesn't matter much in the next year, and no one expects long service for him in the post.

    I don't see much rationale or strategy in the reshuffle, just a desperation to get bums on seats for the next round of chaos.
  • Some thoughts:

    1. Another huge uturn from Sunak. His "the last 30 years were crap, I am Mr Change" agenda never took off. Bringing back his Great-Great-Great-PM as FS kills it completely.
    2. Lord Pigbotherer isn't remotely comparable to Lord Mandy. The latter slimed his way into the machinery of government and brought stability, the former will be sent off to try and sort out Israel and Ukraine and America.
    3. Firing Cruella has lit the fuse on the next round ot the Tory civil war. Bringing McVile in as Bigoted Opinions Czar won't appease them, and is about as laughable a role and hire as could have been done.

    I know that Cameron has fanbois. But his time is long over - we're on our 4th PM since he flounced. Nor will the things I liked about him be allowed to flourish. No progressive politics allowed in today's Fuck Off Tory Party.

    A few people have now posted views that this will only accelerate the Tory collapse towards ELE. Its certainly possible.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672

    Good morning, everyone.

    F1: apparently the Las Vegas race, starting around 10pm locally, will be 5-10 degrees Celsius. I wonder if that means Haas might be value, as overworking tyres, in such temperatures, might be advantageous.

    I read that as 'Hamas might be value', and wondered if the US arm of the Palestinian government were planning a spectacular...
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192
    Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba confirms Bloomberg's report that the EU will not be able to deliver one million artillery shells to Ukraine by March. The minister believes that the reason for this problem is the "deplorable state of the EU's defense industry".
    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1724329093875802543

    Most of their current supply is reportedly from S Korean stocks.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413
    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    ydoethur said:

    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.

    Interesting that Sunak had decided to replace her well before the article, having already set in train the Cameron recruitment.
    I agree. I suspect they had a bust up a while back. She then went more progressively out on a limb to embarrass him and he lined up a successor . Neither was shocked at the sacking.
    It does make him look marginally more decisive than he was being given credit for last week.

    It will be interesting to see how much of a role Cameron is given outside if his direct brief. I am guessing his appointment signals a deliberate change in the political complexion of Sunak's government.
    Cant see how much will change. Sunak has done little with his tenure as PM.

    Hunt will no doubt spring out and claim he has done all this hard work and followed Rishsi plan so we can have a bit of our own money back before an election. Bribing us with our own money as the saying goes. But it will be market day and he wont have done enough to fatten the pig.

    We will go in to an election with three parties trying to claim the same space and choice only available at the extremes.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413
    Nigelb said:

    Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba confirms Bloomberg's report that the EU will not be able to deliver one million artillery shells to Ukraine by March. The minister believes that the reason for this problem is the "deplorable state of the EU's defense industry".
    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1724329093875802543

    Most of their current supply is reportedly from S Korean stocks.

    Sad, cheered up only by the Russians being not far behind. Theyre getting theirs from N Korea
  • Nigelb said:

    Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba confirms Bloomberg's report that the EU will not be able to deliver one million artillery shells to Ukraine by March. The minister believes that the reason for this problem is the "deplorable state of the EU's defense industry".
    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1724329093875802543

    Most of their current supply is reportedly from S Korean stocks.

    I asked a question on here about this a while ago. I understand that our munitions manufacturing capability is also woeful.
    Perhaps Lord Greensill's first trip should be to S Korea.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,706

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    ydoethur said:

    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.

    Interesting that Sunak had decided to replace her well before the article, having already set in train the Cameron recruitment.
    I agree. I suspect they had a bust up a while back. She then went more progressively out on a limb to embarrass him and he lined up a successor . Neither was shocked at the sacking.
    It does make him look marginally more decisive than he was being given credit for last week.

    It will be interesting to see how much of a role Cameron is given outside if his direct brief. I am guessing his appointment signals a deliberate change in the political complexion of Sunak's government.
    Cant see how much will change. Sunak has done little with his tenure as PM.

    Hunt will no doubt spring out and claim he has done all this hard work and followed Rishsi plan so we can have a bit of our own money back before an election. Bribing us with our own money as the saying goes. But it will be market day and he wont have done enough to fatten the pig.

    We will go in to an election with three parties trying to claim the same space and choice only available at the extremes.
    All three parties are hedged in by the same demographic and economic constraints as well as the dead albatross of Brexit, so not surprising that they look the same.

    There is no original political thought out there, nor coherent plan for the country.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192

    Nigelb said:

    Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba confirms Bloomberg's report that the EU will not be able to deliver one million artillery shells to Ukraine by March. The minister believes that the reason for this problem is the "deplorable state of the EU's defense industry".
    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1724329093875802543

    Most of their current supply is reportedly from S Korean stocks.

    Sad, cheered up only by the Russians being not far behind. Theyre getting theirs from N Korea
    Notably most of the reported Russian armour and other vehicle losses currently being reported are to suicide drones.
  • Foxy said:

    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    "Common Sense" often seems to describe a certain set of right-wing opinions, in the absence of any rational arguments to justify them.
    I agree, but what does the job actually entail? Is there any brief to actually do anything?
    Isn't it the bog standard Minister Without Portfolio For Tricky Interviews?

    Odd that the key "talking not doing" roles (McVey, Holden, is Anderson still there?) have gone to Red Wall types.
    Yes, Fuck Off is still the Vice Chair of the Tory Party.

    Would anyone want the talking not doing role now? You only embarrass yourself. IIRC James Heappey was sent out by the party yesterday morning to prattle on about how Sunak has faith in Braverman, only for her to be fired whilst he was on air defending her...
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,281
    ydoethur said:

    Heathener said:

    Chris said:

    But seriously.

    "No doubt Labour is digging furiously to find if there are any negatives that would undermine him and of course the PM."

    Is there any need to dig? On the podcast, Campbell had a list immediately (and Stewart was scathing about Cameron's history in foreign affairs).

    Yep there’s no need to dig.

    Greenshill stinks.

    It is WELL worth reading Suzanne Heywood’s ‘What Does Jeremy Think?’. In fact, I’d urge everyone on here to read it if they haven’t already done so. Although Suzanne is careful, Cameron comes out of it smelling like excrement.

    https://www.amazon.co.uk/What-Does-Jeremy-Think-Heywood-ebook/dp/B081ZJCJ3M

    p.s. It’s difficult to see how anyone posting on here about the politics of the last 25 years in this country can do so without having read this book.
    Greensill stinks

    Cameron was naive and greedy, and taken in by Jeremy Heywood’s reference. He made a fool of himself and perhaps tried to leverage contacts a little hard.

    But at the heart of it, he was taken in by a smooth talking shyster.

    So it was bad judgement rather than corruption.

    It's just as well then that as Foreign Secretary he will never need to make careful judgements of either people
    or projects.
    Sure. And that’s fair criticism of him (I don’t rate Cameron) - he was the smooth talking salesman to Osborne’s scheming.

    But that’s not the line that Heathener is playing
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672

    Some thoughts:

    1. Another huge uturn from Sunak. His "the last 30 years were crap, I am Mr Change" agenda never took off. Bringing back his Great-Great-Great-PM as FS kills it completely.
    2. Lord Pigbotherer isn't remotely comparable to Lord Mandy. The latter slimed his way into the machinery of government and brought stability, the former will be sent off to try and sort out Israel and Ukraine and America.
    3. Firing Cruella has lit the fuse on the next round ot the Tory civil war. Bringing McVile in as Bigoted Opinions Czar won't appease them, and is about as laughable a role and hire as could have been done.

    I know that Cameron has fanbois. But his time is long over - we're on our 4th PM since he flounced. Nor will the things I liked about him be allowed to flourish. No progressive politics allowed in today's Fuck Off Tory Party.

    A few people have now posted views that this will only accelerate the Tory collapse towards ELE. Its certainly possible.

    Mandelson did not 'bring stability'. He did make himself a lot of money, though...

    Remember, he resigned from government *twice*. Once over a dodgy loan; the other over a dodgy passport application.
  • Some thoughts:

    1. Another huge uturn from Sunak. His "the last 30 years were crap, I am Mr Change" agenda never took off. Bringing back his Great-Great-Great-PM as FS kills it completely.
    2. Lord Pigbotherer isn't remotely comparable to Lord Mandy. The latter slimed his way into the machinery of government and brought stability, the former will be sent off to try and sort out Israel and Ukraine and America.
    3. Firing Cruella has lit the fuse on the next round ot the Tory civil war. Bringing McVile in as Bigoted Opinions Czar won't appease them, and is about as laughable a role and hire as could have been done.

    I know that Cameron has fanbois. But his time is long over - we're on our 4th PM since he flounced. Nor will the things I liked about him be allowed to flourish. No progressive politics allowed in today's Fuck Off Tory Party.

    A few people have now posted views that this will only accelerate the Tory collapse towards ELE. Its certainly possible.

    Mandelson did not 'bring stability'. He did make himself a lot of money, though...

    Remember, he resigned from government *twice*. Once over a dodgy loan; the other over a dodgy passport application.
    He did bring stability to Brown's government.

    Plus it is a bit of antisemitic trope to accuse a Jew of being money obsessed.
  • I have turned down the job of Dave's special adviser.

    Apparently declaring war on France isn't Dave's priority for his stint in the Foreign Office.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413
    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    ydoethur said:

    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.

    Interesting that Sunak had decided to replace her well before the article, having already set in train the Cameron recruitment.
    I agree. I suspect they had a bust up a while back. She then went more progressively out on a limb to embarrass him and he lined up a successor . Neither was shocked at the sacking.
    It does make him look marginally more decisive than he was being given credit for last week.

    It will be interesting to see how much of a role Cameron is given outside if his direct brief. I am guessing his appointment signals a deliberate change in the political complexion of Sunak's government.
    Cant see how much will change. Sunak has done little with his tenure as PM.

    Hunt will no doubt spring out and claim he has done all this hard work and followed Rishsi plan so we can have a bit of our own money back before an election. Bribing us with our own money as the saying goes. But it will be market day and he wont have done enough to fatten the pig.

    We will go in to an election with three parties trying to claim the same space and choice only available at the extremes.
    All three parties are hedged in by the same demographic and economic constraints as well as the dead albatross of Brexit, so not surprising that they look the same.

    There is no original political thought out there, nor coherent plan for the country.
    This dead albatross exists only in your head. The UK has not collapsed post Brexit. Brexits failure is not to have delivered more upside than if we had stayed in, you can debate all day as to why.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,672
    gonatas said:

    Nigelb said:

    Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba confirms Bloomberg's report that the EU will not be able to deliver one million artillery shells to Ukraine by March. The minister believes that the reason for this problem is the "deplorable state of the EU's defense industry".
    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1724329093875802543

    Most of their current supply is reportedly from S Korean stocks.

    I asked a question on here about this a while ago. I understand that our munitions manufacturing capability is also woeful.
    Perhaps Lord Greensill's first trip should be to S Korea.
    It's a problem around the world. There have been no major conflicts requiring munitions, so everyone has regressed to more or less peacetime levels. From an article I saw, some of the machines the US uses to construct shells is fairly ancient. We need to ramp up PDQ; but that takes money...

    Australia recently finished a major plant, though.
    https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/general/first-exports-roll-out-of-rheinmetall-nioa-munitions-factory
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428
    edited November 2023
    Agree with @StillWaters . Osborne would be the much more interesting comeback character. A genuine political brain and a real schemer - he is the Mandelson, not Cameron. David Duke of Brexit was only ever the ham-faced Etonian concierge

    Get Osborne back and things might actually liven up for the Tories

  • On topic, there's polling showing the voters say Dave was a better PM than Sunak, Sunak has brought his successor into government.

    Rishi Sunak will be unusually sharing the cabinet table with a former prime minster. But how do Britons think the current PM compares with his predecessor?

    36% think Sunak has been a worse PM than Cameron, while 16% think he has been better, and 34% about the same.




    https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1724033343967080888/photo/1
  • sbjme19sbjme19 Posts: 194
    I suppose Rishi has to do something to appease the right wing but the McVey appointment just sounds silly and from what I've seen of Holden he seems rather an aggressive, short-fuse type.....not a blue wall winner.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413

    gonatas said:

    Nigelb said:

    Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba confirms Bloomberg's report that the EU will not be able to deliver one million artillery shells to Ukraine by March. The minister believes that the reason for this problem is the "deplorable state of the EU's defense industry".
    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1724329093875802543

    Most of their current supply is reportedly from S Korean stocks.

    I asked a question on here about this a while ago. I understand that our munitions manufacturing capability is also woeful.
    Perhaps Lord Greensill's first trip should be to S Korea.
    It's a problem around the world. There have been no major conflicts requiring munitions, so everyone has regressed to more or less peacetime levels. From an article I saw, some of the machines the US uses to construct shells is fairly ancient. We need to ramp up PDQ; but that takes money...

    Australia recently finished a major plant, though.
    https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/general/first-exports-roll-out-of-rheinmetall-nioa-munitions-factory
    There is old plant because the cold war was over and noone wanted to upgrade. I suspect hat will rapidly change. 18 months Id say to get a new production line up and running.
  • The country went to the dogs since we started having PMs in the Commons.

    Time to Make the UK Great Again by having a PM from the Lords.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,448

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    ydoethur said:

    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.

    Interesting that Sunak had decided to replace her well before the article, having already set in train the Cameron recruitment.
    I agree. I suspect they had a bust up a while back. She then went more progressively out on a limb to embarrass him and he lined up a successor . Neither was shocked at the sacking.
    It does make him look marginally more decisive than he was being given credit for last week.

    It will be interesting to see how much of a role Cameron is given outside if his direct brief. I am guessing his appointment signals a deliberate change in the political complexion of Sunak's government.
    Cant see how much will change. Sunak has done little with his tenure as PM.

    Hunt will no doubt spring out and claim he has done all this hard work and followed Rishsi plan so we can have a bit of our own money back before an election. Bribing us with our own money as the saying goes. But it will be market day and he wont have done enough to fatten the pig.

    We will go in to an election with three parties trying to claim the same space and choice only available at the extremes.
    All three parties are hedged in by the same demographic and economic constraints as well as the dead albatross of Brexit, so not surprising that they look the same.

    There is no original political thought out there, nor coherent plan for the country.
    This dead albatross exists only in your head. The UK has not collapsed post Brexit. Brexits failure is not to have delivered more upside than if we had stayed in, you can debate all day as to why.
    And we will Mr A. And we will!

    And good morning, everybody
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,750
    Nigelb said:

    .

    Chris said:

    Foxy said:

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    What even is a "Minister of Common Sense" and what is their portfolio?

    Glad to see Barclay gone at DoH. He had no interest or aptitude for the NHS. Hopefully Atkins can negotiate an end to the strikes and do something about the retention crisis. Otherwise going nowhere on waiting lists.
    "Common Sense" often seems to describe a certain set of right-wing opinions, in the absence of any rational arguments to justify them.
    Thomas Paine, that well known right winger...
    There's a clue in my comment that I wasn't referring to the 18th century.
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,475

    The Esther McVey appointment is embarrassing. It makes Sunak look ridiculous and will not appease a single one of the loons.

    I don't think it will even appease Esther Mcvey. I can see her embarrassing resignation 'I have discovered that this Government is opposed to common sense' now.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,413
    Leon said:

    Agree with @StillWaters . Osborne would be the much more interesting comeback character. A genuine political brain and a real schemer - he is the Mandelson, not Cameron. David Duke of Brexit was only ever the ham-faced Etonian concierge

    Get Osborne back and things might actually liven up for the Tories

    They might liven up but like Mandelson he is great at creating politcal divide lines at a time when the country needs some serious work done on it. When given a deliverable task like Northern Powerhouse he lost interest and delivered an extra bus.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428

    Foxy said:

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    ydoethur said:

    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.

    Interesting that Sunak had decided to replace her well before the article, having already set in train the Cameron recruitment.
    I agree. I suspect they had a bust up a while back. She then went more progressively out on a limb to embarrass him and he lined up a successor . Neither was shocked at the sacking.
    It does make him look marginally more decisive than he was being given credit for last week.

    It will be interesting to see how much of a role Cameron is given outside if his direct brief. I am guessing his appointment signals a deliberate change in the political complexion of Sunak's government.
    Cant see how much will change. Sunak has done little with his tenure as PM.

    Hunt will no doubt spring out and claim he has done all this hard work and followed Rishsi plan so we can have a bit of our own money back before an election. Bribing us with our own money as the saying goes. But it will be market day and he wont have done enough to fatten the pig.

    We will go in to an election with three parties trying to claim the same space and choice only available at the extremes.
    All three parties are hedged in by the same demographic and economic constraints as well as the dead albatross of Brexit, so not surprising that they look the same.

    There is no original political thought out there, nor coherent plan for the country.
    This dead albatross exists only in your head. The UK has not collapsed post Brexit. Brexits failure is not to have delivered more upside than if we had stayed in, you can debate all day as to why.
    The new passports really are nicer, tho

    I generously accept this is unlikely to mollify the 10m Remoaners driven mad by Brexit. And they have a point

    But the passports are better now - aesthetically. As promised
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,475
    Leon said:

    Agree with @StillWaters . Osborne would be the much more interesting comeback character. A genuine political brain and a real schemer - he is the Mandelson, not Cameron. David Duke of Brexit was only ever the ham-faced Etonian concierge

    Get Osborne back and things might actually liven up for the Tories

    I think the fact it's not Osborne is why I don't mind it. Osborne is genuinely malevolent. Cameron was always an EU enthusiast posing as a euroskeptic, and wasn't a great PM, but I see him doing little harm at the Foreign Office; he looks the part, and lends things a modicum of gravitas.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,390
    edited November 2023

    Nigelb said:

    Nigelb said:

    .

    ydoethur said:

    Somebody asked on the last thread why nobody had a good word to say about Braverman while she was in office.

    I would take issue with this. I had many good words for her.

    I just didn't want to say them on here because OGH would have banned me.

    Interesting that Sunak had decided to replace her well before the article, having already set in train the Cameron recruitment.
    I agree. I suspect they had a bust up a while back. She then went more progressively out on a limb to embarrass him and he lined up a successor . Neither was shocked at the sacking.
    It does make him look marginally more decisive than he was being given credit for last week.

    It will be interesting to see how much of a role Cameron is given outside if his direct brief. I am guessing his appointment signals a deliberate change in the political complexion of Sunak's government.
    Cant see how much will change. Sunak has done little with his tenure as PM.

    Hunt will no doubt spring out and claim he has done all this hard work and followed Rishsi plan so we can have a bit of our own money back before an election. Bribing us with our own money as the saying goes. But it will be market day and he wont have done enough to fatten the pig.

    We will go in to an election with three parties trying to claim the same space and choice only available at the extremes.
    Which is where the Tory party need to be because they will need every vote they can get to minimise their loses.

    Because the easiest decision most people will have is to not vote for the current very tired Government that is utterly out of ideas. The more difficult decision is to then where to cast your vote - Labour / Lib Dem or true protest vote.

    I really do think Carol Vorderman encouraging telling people who to vote for tactically will give the Lib Dems a few seats they may well have otherwise lost by a few hundred votes..

    As @Cicero pointed out on the previous thread - it's perfectly possible for the Tories to end up with 200 seats in the next election or equally 25...
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,418
    dixiedean said:

    Rumours of a freeze in working age benefits.

    Just to remind everyone why they were glad to see Cameron and Osborne piss off in 2016?
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,428

    Leon said:

    Agree with @StillWaters . Osborne would be the much more interesting comeback character. A genuine political brain and a real schemer - he is the Mandelson, not Cameron. David Duke of Brexit was only ever the ham-faced Etonian concierge

    Get Osborne back and things might actually liven up for the Tories

    I think the fact it's not Osborne is why I don't mind it. Osborne is genuinely malevolent. Cameron was always an EU enthusiast posing as a euroskeptic, and wasn't a great PM, but I see him doing little harm at the Foreign Office; he looks the part, and lends things a modicum of gravitas.
    Yeah, but I like malevolent politicians. I liked Mandelson. I liked Machiavelli. They’re honestly nasty and also effective. Ditto Pinochet - he was also unexpectedly entertaining - most people don’t realise Pinochet was a brilliant juggler
  • eekeek Posts: 28,390

    dixiedean said:

    Rumours of a freeze in working age benefits.

    Just to remind everyone why they were glad to see Cameron and Osborne piss off in 2016?
    Even more demand on food banks at a time when less people are donating to them...
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,475
    Leon said:

    Leon said:

    Agree with @StillWaters . Osborne would be the much more interesting comeback character. A genuine political brain and a real schemer - he is the Mandelson, not Cameron. David Duke of Brexit was only ever the ham-faced Etonian concierge

    Get Osborne back and things might actually liven up for the Tories

    I think the fact it's not Osborne is why I don't mind it. Osborne is genuinely malevolent. Cameron was always an EU enthusiast posing as a euroskeptic, and wasn't a great PM, but I see him doing little harm at the Foreign Office; he looks the part, and lends things a modicum of gravitas.
    Yeah, but I like malevolent politicians. I liked Mandelson. I liked Machiavelli. They’re honestly nasty and also effective. Ditto Pinochet - he was also unexpectedly entertaining - most people don’t realise Pinochet was a brilliant juggler
    But that's assuming they are, at heart, on the side of their country. Machiavelli was passionate about his city and wanting it to survive - a hopeless romantic about it really.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,348

    Forty workers trapped in India after a tunnel collapses.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-67411822

    It'd be interesting to know more details on this after they (hopefully!) rescue the men. Was it bad tunnel design/construction, or just bad luck that a landslide occurred whilst it was under construction, when tunnels are at their weakest? The pictures from the interior of the tunnel seem slightly odd from a construction POV, but I'm not an expert.

    (Though I'd argue the construction system should be designed to cope with likely events such as landslides...)

    Edit: this report from the Indy indicates health and safety might not have been quite as stringent as we might hope:
    "“Just a day before, when we were removing a lattice girder, we saw some debris falling. On Saturday night, a piece of concrete fell from the roof. We informed our seniors. But before they could do anything, the incident happened,” he added. The National Highways and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (NHIDCL) is the agency engaged in building the tunnel."

    If you have concrete falling from the roof, I might argue you get the workers further down the tunnel out...

    Isn’t that woke, anti-progress thinking?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,192

    gonatas said:

    Nigelb said:

    Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba confirms Bloomberg's report that the EU will not be able to deliver one million artillery shells to Ukraine by March. The minister believes that the reason for this problem is the "deplorable state of the EU's defense industry".
    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1724329093875802543

    Most of their current supply is reportedly from S Korean stocks.

    I asked a question on here about this a while ago. I understand that our munitions manufacturing capability is also woeful.
    Perhaps Lord Greensill's first trip should be to S Korea.
    It's a problem around the world. There have been no major conflicts requiring munitions, so everyone has regressed to more or less peacetime levels. From an article I saw, some of the machines the US uses to construct shells is fairly ancient. We need to ramp up PDQ; but that takes money...

    Australia recently finished a major plant, though.
    https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/general/first-exports-roll-out-of-rheinmetall-nioa-munitions-factory
    There is old plant because the cold war was over and noone wanted to upgrade. I suspect hat will rapidly change. 18 months Id say to get a new production line up and running.
    They've underfunded the earlier announced plan to ramp up production - though Europe is already now producing considerably more shells than the US, and is like to hit the targeted 80k shells per month some time next year. The US is unlikely to achieve that before the end of 2025.

    There are also plans to build production in Ukraine, but again that's unlikely to happened before 2025.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,348

    I have turned down the job of Dave's special adviser.

    Apparently declaring war on France isn't Dave's priority for his stint in the Foreign Office.

    Your mistake.

    The reason the Foreign Office is called that is that represents the interests of Foreigners.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,595

    gonatas said:

    Nigelb said:

    Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba confirms Bloomberg's report that the EU will not be able to deliver one million artillery shells to Ukraine by March. The minister believes that the reason for this problem is the "deplorable state of the EU's defense industry".
    https://twitter.com/Hromadske/status/1724329093875802543

    Most of their current supply is reportedly from S Korean stocks.

    I asked a question on here about this a while ago. I understand that our munitions manufacturing capability is also woeful.
    Perhaps Lord Greensill's first trip should be to S Korea.
    It's a problem around the world. There have been no major conflicts requiring munitions, so everyone has regressed to more or less peacetime levels. From an article I saw, some of the machines the US uses to construct shells is fairly ancient. We need to ramp up PDQ; but that takes money...

    Australia recently finished a major plant, though.
    https://www.australiandefence.com.au/defence/general/first-exports-roll-out-of-rheinmetall-nioa-munitions-factory
    The Americans will have a new one up and running next year as well, to replace a factory that blew up a couple of years ago. Meanwhile there’s plenty of stockpiles if needed, certainly way more than the Russians can get their hands on from N. Korea.

    Pretty much everything the Russians have pointed to as being a Western weakness, turned out to have been a massive strength compared to their own army. Pointing fingers at Westen ammo shortages is merely a way to distract from their own.
This discussion has been closed.