Howdy, Stranger!

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

Damning polling for Sunak – politicalbetting.com

13

Comments

  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,653
    Eabhal said:

    Apparently 20% of people currently support closing pubs and restaurants (December 2023)

    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1734172331247894591?s=20

    I remember these people calling into Radio Scotland and suggesting banning under 40s from pubs in the winter of 2020/21. They are at least as dangerous as the "let it rip" libertarians.

    In shock news, people who never go the to pub support closing pubs.

    But yes, they should and will rightly be ignored.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496

    Nigelb said:

    Eabhal said:

    Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    The really weird thing is that we are willing to spend £2.4 billion on it (HS2 to Manchester a paltry £36 billion).
    I made the point at the time of the cancellation that this was one of the schemes chosen to go ahead in preference.

    The economic justification for it seems worse than that for HS2.
    https://stonehengealliance.org.uk/weak-business-case/
    Not only that. 50+ years on I still have a memory of the many long holiday trips from London to Devon of my childhood, looking out from the back seat waiting for Stonehenge to come into view, and the excitement when we finally drove past it. We didn't usually stop, yet the sight from the road was magnificent enough to stick in the memory even now. How do you quantify the loss of such memories to future generations of children (and adults), in economic terms?
    Same. I also remember happier days when visitors could walk around the stones unhindered and the whole site was a simple child's joy.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,241

    Roger said:

    I just read that Man Utd have lost more home games since Sir Alex left than in all the 21 years he was at the club.

    Do they have university degrees in finding obscure statistics?

    Just remember statistics are like bikinis, what they reveal is interesting, what they hide is much more fascinating.
    Erm, did you miss the HR circular suggesting we no longer use sexist analogies like this? Circa 2003.
    I always liked the accusation that “he uses statistics like a drunk uses a lamppost: for support rather than illumination”

  • https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1734180461386015185

    Today's political grid

    In which Matt Goodwin decides to give up any semblance of being a respectable academic. He has now completed his story.
  • Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    Different road. There used to be one to the North that ran towards Shrewton.
    No. That road was insignificant compared with the A303 that runs (checks) 200m south of Stonehenge.

    The objections on the basis of trashing the site by removing a trunk road from view are, quite frankly, bonkers.

    These protests are all about the anti-road (indeed the anti-everything) brigade, nothing to do with protecting a World Heritage site.
    Believe me when I say I know all about Stonehenge and the roads - I was brought up in Shrewton for 15 years and my parents still live there. I was being a bit cheeky - the north road was indeed described as an eyesore etc and was closed, although arguably it was more to stop tourists failing to pay to go in (they would stop on the roadside, take photo's over the fence and move on).

    It is a farce right now. There is no need for a tunnel - a decent cutting with the road shifted south by a mile would be fine. In reality there are many who just oppose anything at all.
    One of the reasons given for opposing the tunnel is that without rubber necking from the A303, many less people would see the stones.

    Apparently requiring people to stop, park & walk to the site is too much.

    Sounds American style car mad to me - spiritual experiences at 7000rpm.
    The A303 is so slow there that you have plenty of time to look at Stonehenge. I'm not sure that stopping and parking for the benefit of seeing them slightly closer is really worth it TBH. The view from the road certainly satiated my appetite. The M4/M5 route to Cornwall is better, anyway.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,647

    Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    Different road. There used to be one to the North that ran towards Shrewton.
    No. That road was insignificant compared with the A303 that runs (checks) 200m south of Stonehenge.

    The objections on the basis of trashing the site by removing a trunk road from view are, quite frankly, bonkers.

    These protests are all about the anti-road (indeed the anti-everything) brigade, nothing to do with protecting a World Heritage site.
    Believe me when I say I know all about Stonehenge and the roads - I was brought up in Shrewton for 15 years and my parents still live there. I was being a bit cheeky - the north road was indeed described as an eyesore etc and was closed, although arguably it was more to stop tourists failing to pay to go in (they would stop on the roadside, take photo's over the fence and move on).

    It is a farce right now. There is no need for a tunnel - a decent cutting with the road shifted south by a mile would be fine. In reality there are many who just oppose anything at all.
    Just... £2.4 billion? Seems completely crazy to me.

    I don't get the archaeological opposition to doing a cutting or something. Managed well, it's a funded project for local universities. I had a fascinating conversation with some archaelogists during the Edinburgh Tram extension as they unearthed a possible murder victim just down the road from my flat. https://archaeology.co.uk/articles/news/unusual-burial-discovered-in-leith.htm
  • Eabhal said:

    Apparently 20% of people currently support closing pubs and restaurants (December 2023)

    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1734172331247894591?s=20

    I remember these people calling into Radio Scotland and suggesting banning under 40s from pubs in the winter of 2020/21. They are at least as dangerous as the "let it rip" libertarians.

    Remember that famous poll that said pretty much a quarter of the population never wanted nightclubs to reopen after COVID. Ever.

    Ever.

    A worryingly illiberal mindset is present in a lot of the population.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,653

    Nigelb said:

    Eabhal said:

    Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    The really weird thing is that we are willing to spend £2.4 billion on it (HS2 to Manchester a paltry £36 billion).
    I made the point at the time of the cancellation that this was one of the schemes chosen to go ahead in preference.

    The economic justification for it seems worse than that for HS2.
    https://stonehengealliance.org.uk/weak-business-case/
    Not only that. 50+ years on I still have a memory of the many long holiday trips from London to Devon of my childhood, looking out from the back seat waiting for Stonehenge to come into view, and the excitement when we finally drove past it. We didn't usually stop, yet the sight from the road was magnificent enough to stick in the memory even now. How do you quantify the loss of such memories to future generations of children (and adults), in economic terms?
    On that basis we should have built the M25 through central London, so that you can see all the sights.
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,647

    Nigelb said:

    Eabhal said:

    Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    The really weird thing is that we are willing to spend £2.4 billion on it (HS2 to Manchester a paltry £36 billion).
    I made the point at the time of the cancellation that this was one of the schemes chosen to go ahead in preference.

    The economic justification for it seems worse than that for HS2.
    https://stonehengealliance.org.uk/weak-business-case/
    Not only that. 50+ years on I still have a memory of the many long holiday trips from London to Devon of my childhood, looking out from the back seat waiting for Stonehenge to come into view, and the excitement when we finally drove past it. We didn't usually stop, yet the sight from the road was magnificent enough to stick in the memory even now. How do you quantify the loss of such memories to future generations of children (and adults), in economic terms?
    On that basis we should have built the M25 through central London, so that you can see all the sights.
    Glasgow waves hello
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,984
    If Sunak’s WhatsApps still exist somewhere on the server then surely somebody could uncover them, or uncover evidence of deletion?

    Seems like a revelation just waiting to be made.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,355

    Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    Different road. There used to be one to the North that ran towards Shrewton.
    No. That road was insignificant compared with the A303 that runs (checks) 200m south of Stonehenge.

    The objections on the basis of trashing the site by removing a trunk road from view are, quite frankly, bonkers.

    These protests are all about the anti-road (indeed the anti-everything) brigade, nothing to do with protecting a World Heritage site.
    Yes. For years it was always 'Only the philistine British would ruin a site like Stonehenge by allowing a crappy road to run past it. If they cared they'd invest in a tunnel.' Now the road is apparently the most wonderful thing ever and people are campaigning to save it.
    I don't think that people opposed to the tunnel are in favour of the road, unless it is used by cyclists only, perhaps.

    The road does look a bit less bad than it used to now that the future has it used by zero tailpipe emissions vehicles. Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    There is a list of projects that Britain talks about doing and never manages to get done. Sorting out the A303 past Stonehenge is one. Dualling the A1. Third runway at Heathrow. Fixing up Westminster Palace is becoming another. Possible the Lower Thames Crossing is heading in that direction.

    It's a wonder the channel tunnel was ever completed.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,138
    edited December 2023
    MattW said:

    In 'we're doomed' news


    Back to the 1970s.

    Where's Joe 90 's breeding pod when we need it?
    It's a strange article about 'interesting' people, including one Elon Musk:

    As she says this, her five-month-old daughter Titan Invictus – the couple refuse to give girls feminine names, citing research suggesting they will be taken less seriously – is strapped to her chest, occasionally burbling, while Malcolm has charge of their two sons Torsten, two, and Octavian, three.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/family/life/pronatalists-save-mankind-by-having-babies-silicon-valley/

    ...

    What is to be done? ‘Our solution is, uh, we don’t have a solution,’ he admits. He says the only things proven to increase birth rates are poverty and the oppression of women, which are bad and should be stamped out. The only hope is to find those few families that combine liberal, pluralistic politics, such as support for LGBT rights, with high fertility – or create new, hybrid micro-cultures that value both – and help them multiply.
  • https://x.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1734180461386015185

    Today's political grid

    In which Matt Goodwin decides to give up any semblance of being a respectable academic. He has now completed his story.

    Is the libertarian/authoritarian axis the wrong way round here?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,653

    Eabhal said:

    Apparently 20% of people currently support closing pubs and restaurants (December 2023)

    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1734172331247894591?s=20

    I remember these people calling into Radio Scotland and suggesting banning under 40s from pubs in the winter of 2020/21. They are at least as dangerous as the "let it rip" libertarians.

    Remember that famous poll that said pretty much a quarter of the population never wanted nightclubs to reopen after COVID. Ever.

    Ever.

    A worryingly illiberal mindset is present in a lot of the population.
    Indeed. I would love to see an age breakdown of that 20-25%.
  • "As I have changed my phones, the messages wouldn't have come across."

    Rishi Sunak's words.

    Unless you specifically choose not to bring the messages across, they always come across.

    I think folk will just presume he’s lying. Most folks have WhatsApp. Most folks have upgraded phones. So they will know how simple it is to migrate to a new phone and keep all their chats.

    But I guess he knows this but what are his options? Stick with idea that he’s a clutz with tech that everyone thinks is fishy. Or say he took steps to erase his past text messages? I guess it is probably better to have folks thinking there is a cover up rather than them knowing there was.

    Personally, I don’t think he’s as good at tech as he thinks he is and can well believe he’s lost them accidentally. However, what still staggers me more is that they are conducting Government business over texts - what’s more WhatsApp. And this is somehow acceptable. It is not. I can’t understand why the civil service, security services or even the ICO haven’t / didn’t kick up more of a stink about this.

    Even the banks have been fined handsomely for doing that sort of thing.
  • Jim_MillerJim_Miller Posts: 2,998
    Two general thoughts on pandemics: First, globalization and diversity make them more likely; density makes them more deadly. These are not new observations, but it surprises me a bit to see how few pay attention to these lessons from history.

    (I would agree that all three are, net, still "good things", though all of them can be overdone.)

    Second, if I were running an inquiry, I would begin by studying the differences in other nations (or in the US among states). For example, why did Austria have so much lower a death rate than its neighbor, the Czech Republic?

    It is often easier to learn from other's experience than from our own.

    (Those interested in this subject may want to read Bill Gates' book. I found it sensible and liked the fact that he was looking for ways to improve, not people to blame.)
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,984

    Eabhal said:

    Apparently 20% of people currently support closing pubs and restaurants (December 2023)

    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1734172331247894591?s=20

    I remember these people calling into Radio Scotland and suggesting banning under 40s from pubs in the winter of 2020/21. They are at least as dangerous as the "let it rip" libertarians.

    Remember that famous poll that said pretty much a quarter of the population never wanted nightclubs to reopen after COVID. Ever.

    Ever.

    A worryingly illiberal mindset is present in a lot of the population.
    It’s worryingly present across all age groups and all political persuasions too. Who are these people?
  • EabhalEabhal Posts: 8,647

    Eabhal said:

    Apparently 20% of people currently support closing pubs and restaurants (December 2023)

    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1734172331247894591?s=20

    I remember these people calling into Radio Scotland and suggesting banning under 40s from pubs in the winter of 2020/21. They are at least as dangerous as the "let it rip" libertarians.

    Remember that famous poll that said pretty much a quarter of the population never wanted nightclubs to reopen after COVID. Ever.

    Ever.

    A worryingly illiberal mindset is present in a lot of the population.
    I know it's very boring but the most sensible position on lockdowns is somewhere in the middle of the two extremes, and has you have to appreciate the benefit of hindsight.

    The greatest inequity was that so much of the cost fell on younger people, directly through education or indirectly because they are less likely to have gardens etc. I wonder how different it might have been under Labour - stricter perhaps, but fairer.
  • "As I have changed my phones, the messages wouldn't have come across."

    Rishi Sunak's words.

    Unless you specifically choose not to bring the messages across, they always come across.

    I think folk will just presume he’s lying. Most folks have WhatsApp. Most folks have upgraded phones. So they will know how simple it is to migrate to a new phone and keep all their chats.

    But I guess he knows this but what are his options? Stick with idea that he’s a clutz with tech that everyone thinks is fishy. Or say he took steps to erase his past text messages? I guess it is probably better to have folks thinking there is a cover up rather than them knowing there was.

    Personally, I don’t think he’s as good at tech as he thinks he is and can well believe he’s lost them accidentally. However, what still staggers me more is that they are conducting Government business over texts - what’s more WhatsApp. And this is somehow acceptable. It is not. I can’t understand why the civil service, security services or even the ICO haven’t / didn’t kick up more of a stink about this.

    Even the banks have been fined handsomely for doing that sort of thing.
    I’m surprised that in a government that featured JRM they weren’t conducting government business by carrier pigeon, frankly.

    (But I agree with your point!)
  • TimS said:

    Eabhal said:

    Apparently 20% of people currently support closing pubs and restaurants (December 2023)

    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1734172331247894591?s=20

    I remember these people calling into Radio Scotland and suggesting banning under 40s from pubs in the winter of 2020/21. They are at least as dangerous as the "let it rip" libertarians.

    Remember that famous poll that said pretty much a quarter of the population never wanted nightclubs to reopen after COVID. Ever.

    Ever.

    A worryingly illiberal mindset is present in a lot of the population.
    It’s worryingly present across all age groups and all political persuasions too. Who are these people?
    Nutjobs.
  • algarkirk said:

    Some insane stats from the usually fairly accurate Economist:
    57% of students claim to have a mental health issue
    75%+ parents sought mental health advice for children in 2021/2
    25%+ 16-18 yo are given extra time in official exams because of health conditions.

    Can any of this be true?

    One issue is that many students are deploying 'issues; to gain advantage in exams etc. We have hoards of students with DAPs (disability action plans) than get them extra time in exams etc.

    Now they may ALL be genuine, but my skeptical head says not. Its another way to game the system.

    Quite what they expect in the workplace I have no idea, Boots won't be happy with you getting extra time to do your job...
    First, it could all be genuine and there are more and more mental health issues, and indeed physical ones. This should not be controversial. Simple observations tells us more people are obese; more people are short-sighted; more people have dementia (there's a mental health issue!).

    Second, as well as deeply cynical students claiming extra time, there is a recent tendency to medicalise personality traits. Introverts who can add up are now "on the spectrum" (cf Leon passim). Wash your hands after relieving yourself? OCD. No girlfriend? Aspies. Like trains? Erm, I'd best stop there.

    The point is that as the notion of what constitutes a mental health issue has been broadened, it naturally follows that more and more people get to tick the yes box, alongside genuinely new cases rather than just self-diagnosed or reclassified older ones.

  • Eabhal said:

    Eabhal said:

    Apparently 20% of people currently support closing pubs and restaurants (December 2023)

    https://x.com/LukeTryl/status/1734172331247894591?s=20

    I remember these people calling into Radio Scotland and suggesting banning under 40s from pubs in the winter of 2020/21. They are at least as dangerous as the "let it rip" libertarians.

    Remember that famous poll that said pretty much a quarter of the population never wanted nightclubs to reopen after COVID. Ever.

    Ever.

    A worryingly illiberal mindset is present in a lot of the population.
    I know it's very boring but the most sensible position on lockdowns is somewhere in the middle of the two extremes, and has you have to appreciate the benefit of hindsight.

    The greatest inequity was that so much of the cost fell on younger people, directly through education or indirectly because they are less likely to have gardens etc. I wonder how different it might have been under Labour - stricter perhaps, but fairer.
    Stricter I sense but fairer in what respect? As you’ve identified the cost on mental health, learning etc disproportionally fell on the young. How would Labour have changed that?

    The situation that absolutely could have been fairer was the weird tier system though, which was absolutely ridiculous and a complete postcode lottery, that showed itself to be completely useless fairly soon after implementation.
  • algarkirk said:

    Some insane stats from the usually fairly accurate Economist:
    57% of students claim to have a mental health issue
    75%+ parents sought mental health advice for children in 2021/2
    25%+ 16-18 yo are given extra time in official exams because of health conditions.

    Can any of this be true?

    One issue is that many students are deploying 'issues; to gain advantage in exams etc. We have hoards of students with DAPs (disability action plans) than get them extra time in exams etc.

    Now they may ALL be genuine, but my skeptical head says not. Its another way to game the system.

    Quite what they expect in the workplace I have no idea, Boots won't be happy with you getting extra time to do your job...
    First, it could all be genuine and there are more and more mental health issues, and indeed physical ones. This should not be controversial. Simple observations tells us more people are obese; more people are short-sighted; more people have dementia (there's a mental health issue!).

    Second, as well as deeply cynical students claiming extra time, there is a recent tendency to medicalise personality traits. Introverts who can add up are now "on the spectrum" (cf Leon passim). Wash your hands after relieving yourself? OCD. No girlfriend? Aspies. Like trains? Erm, I'd best stop there.

    The point is that as the notion of what constitutes a mental health issue has been broadened, it naturally follows that more and more people get to tick the yes box, alongside genuinely new cases rather than just self-diagnosed or reclassified older ones.

    What was bullying is now medical, I am not sure if this is a good improvement or not to be honest.
  • Young people have been utterly screwed by this government on Covid and the aftermath, utterly screwed.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,886
    edited December 2023
    UK tax level rises to highest on record – OECD
    https://www.independent.co.uk/business/uk-tax-level-rises-to-highest-on-record-oecd-b2461712.html

    Bloody Rachel Reeves.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,653

    Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    Different road. There used to be one to the North that ran towards Shrewton.
    No. That road was insignificant compared with the A303 that runs (checks) 200m south of Stonehenge.

    The objections on the basis of trashing the site by removing a trunk road from view are, quite frankly, bonkers.

    These protests are all about the anti-road (indeed the anti-everything) brigade, nothing to do with protecting a World Heritage site.
    Yes. For years it was always 'Only the philistine British would ruin a site like Stonehenge by allowing a crappy road to run past it. If they cared they'd invest in a tunnel.' Now the road is apparently the most wonderful thing ever and people are campaigning to save it.
    I don't think that people opposed to the tunnel are in favour of the road, unless it is used by cyclists only, perhaps.

    The road does look a bit less bad than it used to now that the future has it used by zero tailpipe emissions vehicles. Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    There is a list of projects that Britain talks about doing and never manages to get done. Sorting out the A303 past Stonehenge is one. Dualling the A1. Third runway at Heathrow. Fixing up Westminster Palace is becoming another. Possible the Lower Thames Crossing is heading in that direction.

    It's a wonder the channel tunnel was ever completed.
    The French were involved in the channel tunnel. We should oursource all our motorways and inter-city rail to the French, we'd have much improved infrastructure in 20 years time.

    Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    This I find baffling. If the archeology remains underground we will never know about it. Will it be destroyed by the tunnel (or by a cutting)? No, it will be carefully excavated, documented, and stored in museums for future academic research. Try researching artefacts premanently buried 2m underground.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,070

    algarkirk said:

    Some insane stats from the usually fairly accurate Economist:
    57% of students claim to have a mental health issue
    75%+ parents sought mental health advice for children in 2021/2
    25%+ 16-18 yo are given extra time in official exams because of health conditions.

    Can any of this be true?

    One issue is that many students are deploying 'issues; to gain advantage in exams etc. We have hoards of students with DAPs (disability action plans) than get them extra time in exams etc.

    Now they may ALL be genuine, but my skeptical head says not. Its another way to game the system.

    Quite what they expect in the workplace I have no idea, Boots won't be happy with you getting extra time to do your job...
    First, it could all be genuine and there are more and more mental health issues, and indeed physical ones. This should not be controversial. Simple observations tells us more people are obese; more people are short-sighted; more people have dementia (there's a mental health issue!).

    Second, as well as deeply cynical students claiming extra time, there is a recent tendency to medicalise personality traits. Introverts who can add up are now "on the spectrum" (cf Leon passim). Wash your hands after relieving yourself? OCD. No girlfriend? Aspies. Like trains? Erm, I'd best stop there.

    The point is that as the notion of what constitutes a mental health issue has been broadened, it naturally follows that more and more people get to tick the yes box, alongside genuinely new cases rather than just self-diagnosed or reclassified older ones.

    I have a well-rehearsed rant about this: the TLDR version is that disorders should be moved outside the NHS (later modified to "..except where life threatening"). Science has advanced to the point where normal human variation is medicalised and can be treated, which is of debatable advantage to the person and disadvantage to others.
  • "As I have changed my phones, the messages wouldn't have come across."

    Rishi Sunak's words.

    Unless you specifically choose not to bring the messages across, they always come across.

    I think folk will just presume he’s lying. Most folks have WhatsApp. Most folks have upgraded phones. So they will know how simple it is to migrate to a new phone and keep all their chats.

    But I guess he knows this but what are his options? Stick with idea that he’s a clutz with tech that everyone thinks is fishy. Or say he took steps to erase his past text messages? I guess it is probably better to have folks thinking there is a cover up rather than them knowing there was.

    Personally, I don’t think he’s as good at tech as he thinks he is and can well believe he’s lost them accidentally. However, what still staggers me more is that they are conducting Government business over texts - what’s more WhatsApp. And this is somehow acceptable. It is not. I can’t understand why the civil service, security services or even the ICO haven’t / didn’t kick up more of a stink about this.

    Even the banks have been fined handsomely for doing that sort of thing.
    The real problem is government by Whatsapp, Zoom and any other foreign-controlled messaging service, rather than keeping everything under civil service control and properly curated.
  • Slight cultural discombobulating at the bus stop: young Scottish woman burbling away to her pals on her phone dropping ‘innit’ and ‘holmes’ into her convo like nobody’s business. Not a single swear word either, equally disturbing.
  • Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    Different road. There used to be one to the North that ran towards Shrewton.
    No. That road was insignificant compared with the A303 that runs (checks) 200m south of Stonehenge.

    The objections on the basis of trashing the site by removing a trunk road from view are, quite frankly, bonkers.

    These protests are all about the anti-road (indeed the anti-everything) brigade, nothing to do with protecting a World Heritage site.
    Yes. For years it was always 'Only the philistine British would ruin a site like Stonehenge by allowing a crappy road to run past it. If they cared they'd invest in a tunnel.' Now the road is apparently the most wonderful thing ever and people are campaigning to save it.
    I don't think that people opposed to the tunnel are in favour of the road, unless it is used by cyclists only, perhaps.

    The road does look a bit less bad than it used to now that the future has it used by zero tailpipe emissions vehicles. Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    There is a list of projects that Britain talks about doing and never manages to get done. Sorting out the A303 past Stonehenge is one. Dualling the A1. Third runway at Heathrow. Fixing up Westminster Palace is becoming another. Possible the Lower Thames Crossing is heading in that direction.

    It's a wonder the channel tunnel was ever completed.
    The French were involved in the channel tunnel. We should oursource all our motorways and inter-city rail to the French, we'd have much improved infrastructure in 20 years time.

    Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    This I find baffling. If the archeology remains underground we will never know about it. Will it be destroyed by the tunnel (or by a cutting)? No, it will be carefully excavated, documented, and stored in museums for future academic research. Try researching artefacts premanently buried 2m underground.
    We could outsource our infrastructure to the Northern Irish, who seem to have no trouble running a publicly-owned railway system which runs on time and is cheap.
  • "As I have changed my phones, the messages wouldn't have come across."

    Rishi Sunak's words.

    Unless you specifically choose not to bring the messages across, they always come across.

    I think folk will just presume he’s lying. Most folks have WhatsApp. Most folks have upgraded phones. So they will know how simple it is to migrate to a new phone and keep all their chats.

    But I guess he knows this but what are his options? Stick with idea that he’s a clutz with tech that everyone thinks is fishy. Or say he took steps to erase his past text messages? I guess it is probably better to have folks thinking there is a cover up rather than them knowing there was.

    Personally, I don’t think he’s as good at tech as he thinks he is and can well believe he’s lost them accidentally. However, what still staggers me more is that they are conducting Government business over texts - what’s more WhatsApp. And this is somehow acceptable. It is not. I can’t understand why the civil service, security services or even the ICO haven’t / didn’t kick up more of a stink about this.

    Even the banks have been fined handsomely for doing that sort of thing.
    The real problem is government by Whatsapp, Zoom and any other foreign-controlled messaging service, rather than keeping everything under civil service control and properly curated.
    There is an interesting point here, in that the digital age whilst making us far more educated in one sense, means politicians constantly have to react and so have no time to actually think about what is going to happen more than one minute ahead. And because of this you get these weird, last minute decisions like the recent Tory economic strategy.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,653

    Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    Different road. There used to be one to the North that ran towards Shrewton.
    No. That road was insignificant compared with the A303 that runs (checks) 200m south of Stonehenge.

    The objections on the basis of trashing the site by removing a trunk road from view are, quite frankly, bonkers.

    These protests are all about the anti-road (indeed the anti-everything) brigade, nothing to do with protecting a World Heritage site.
    Yes. For years it was always 'Only the philistine British would ruin a site like Stonehenge by allowing a crappy road to run past it. If they cared they'd invest in a tunnel.' Now the road is apparently the most wonderful thing ever and people are campaigning to save it.
    I don't think that people opposed to the tunnel are in favour of the road, unless it is used by cyclists only, perhaps.

    The road does look a bit less bad than it used to now that the future has it used by zero tailpipe emissions vehicles. Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    There is a list of projects that Britain talks about doing and never manages to get done. Sorting out the A303 past Stonehenge is one. Dualling the A1. Third runway at Heathrow. Fixing up Westminster Palace is becoming another. Possible the Lower Thames Crossing is heading in that direction.

    It's a wonder the channel tunnel was ever completed.
    The French were involved in the channel tunnel. We should oursource all our motorways and inter-city rail to the French, we'd have much improved infrastructure in 20 years time.

    Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    This I find baffling. If the archeology remains underground we will never know about it. Will it be destroyed by the tunnel (or by a cutting)? No, it will be carefully excavated, documented, and stored in museums for future academic research. Try researching artefacts premanently buried 2m underground.
    We could outsource our infrastructure to the Northern Irish, who seem to have no trouble running a publicly-owned railway system which runs on time and is cheap.
    That can't be true, all transport systems have to be run for profit else you cannot achieve the wonderful efficiency and reliability of the rest-of-UK rail and bus services.
  • AverageNinjaAverageNinja Posts: 1,169
    edited December 2023

    That can't be true, all transport systems have to be run for profit else you cannot achieve the wonderful efficiency and reliability of the rest-of-UK rail and bus services.

    I honestly think the UK must be the best argument against privatisation there has ever been.
  • Was lockdown necessary? I am not even sure at this point if it was, having been a strong advocate of it at the time.
  • Nigelb said:

    Eabhal said:

    Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    The really weird thing is that we are willing to spend £2.4 billion on it (HS2 to Manchester a paltry £36 billion).
    I made the point at the time of the cancellation that this was one of the schemes chosen to go ahead in preference.

    The economic justification for it seems worse than that for HS2.
    https://stonehengealliance.org.uk/weak-business-case/
    Not only that. 50+ years on I still have a memory of the many long holiday trips from London to Devon of my childhood, looking out from the back seat waiting for Stonehenge to come into view, and the excitement when we finally drove past it. We didn't usually stop, yet the sight from the road was magnificent enough to stick in the memory even now. How do you quantify the loss of such memories to future generations of children (and adults), in economic terms?
    On that basis we should have built the M25 through central London, so that you can see all the sights.
    There was a proposal to build a motorway on the Thames...
  • Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    Different road. There used to be one to the North that ran towards Shrewton.
    No. That road was insignificant compared with the A303 that runs (checks) 200m south of Stonehenge.

    The objections on the basis of trashing the site by removing a trunk road from view are, quite frankly, bonkers.

    These protests are all about the anti-road (indeed the anti-everything) brigade, nothing to do with protecting a World Heritage site.
    Yes. For years it was always 'Only the philistine British would ruin a site like Stonehenge by allowing a crappy road to run past it. If they cared they'd invest in a tunnel.' Now the road is apparently the most wonderful thing ever and people are campaigning to save it.
    I don't think that people opposed to the tunnel are in favour of the road, unless it is used by cyclists only, perhaps.

    The road does look a bit less bad than it used to now that the future has it used by zero tailpipe emissions vehicles. Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    There is a list of projects that Britain talks about doing and never manages to get done. Sorting out the A303 past Stonehenge is one. Dualling the A1. Third runway at Heathrow. Fixing up Westminster Palace is becoming another. Possible the Lower Thames Crossing is heading in that direction.

    It's a wonder the channel tunnel was ever completed.
    The French were involved in the channel tunnel. We should oursource all our motorways and inter-city rail to the French, we'd have much improved infrastructure in 20 years time.

    Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    This I find baffling. If the archeology remains underground we will never know about it. Will it be destroyed by the tunnel (or by a cutting)? No, it will be carefully excavated, documented, and stored in museums for future academic research. Try researching artefacts premanently buried 2m underground.
    We could outsource our infrastructure to the Northern Irish, who seem to have no trouble running a publicly-owned railway system which runs on time and is cheap.
    That can't be true, all transport systems have to be run for profit else you cannot achieve the wonderful efficiency and reliability of the rest-of-UK rail and bus services.
    Sat in a meeting this morning. People from various parts of the UK saying they are done with rail travel. Endless repeated major delays and cancellations mean they just aren't reliable enough to be trusted.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,653

    Was lockdown necessary? I am not even sure at this point if it was, having been a strong advocate of it at the time.

    Knowing a few people, apparently fit and healthy, who nearly succumbed to Covid in early 2020, I remain an advocate of the lockdowns at least until the majority of the population was vaccinated.
  • Meanwhile, in Scotland Carry on Sterilising

    Doctors will be given approval to keep prescribing puberty-blocking drugs to young people under plans to standardise gender identification services in Scotland.

    NHS England announced last year that hormone treatments would be prescribed to children only as part of clinical research after a report said that there were “gaps in evidence” on their safety and effectiveness.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/puberty-blockers-trans-youth-scotland-gbdj869h0
  • Sat in a meeting this morning. People from various parts of the UK saying they are done with rail travel. Endless repeated major delays and cancellations mean they just aren't reliable enough to be trusted.

    The problem with the UK rail system is that not only it is expensive, it is unreliable too.

    If it was expensive but Swiss-style, I think people would tolerate it. But they don't, because it isn't.

    France's system might not be better in actuality, same as Germany's (haven't seen the recent figures but I believe long-form services are more unreliable in those countries but short-form services are more reliable) but they aren't spending £300 to get from Berlin to Hamburg
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,496

    Now. Stonehenge. I grew up being told that the road that ran alongside it was a bloody eyesore and putting the traffic through a tunnel would restore the site's peace and ancient mysticism. But now, apparently, the road is great and the tunnel an act of cultural barbrarism.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/dec/11/stonehenge-campaigners-last-chance-bid-to-save-site-from-road-tunnel

    What's changed?

    Different road. There used to be one to the North that ran towards Shrewton.
    No. That road was insignificant compared with the A303 that runs (checks) 200m south of Stonehenge.

    The objections on the basis of trashing the site by removing a trunk road from view are, quite frankly, bonkers.

    These protests are all about the anti-road (indeed the anti-everything) brigade, nothing to do with protecting a World Heritage site.
    Yes. For years it was always 'Only the philistine British would ruin a site like Stonehenge by allowing a crappy road to run past it. If they cared they'd invest in a tunnel.' Now the road is apparently the most wonderful thing ever and people are campaigning to save it.
    I don't think that people opposed to the tunnel are in favour of the road, unless it is used by cyclists only, perhaps.

    The road does look a bit less bad than it used to now that the future has it used by zero tailpipe emissions vehicles. Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    There is a list of projects that Britain talks about doing and never manages to get done. Sorting out the A303 past Stonehenge is one. Dualling the A1. Third runway at Heathrow. Fixing up Westminster Palace is becoming another. Possible the Lower Thames Crossing is heading in that direction.

    It's a wonder the channel tunnel was ever completed.
    The French were involved in the channel tunnel. We should oursource all our motorways and inter-city rail to the French, we'd have much improved infrastructure in 20 years time.

    Meanwhile the tunnel risks destroying a lot of the archaeology under the ground, possibly.

    This I find baffling. If the archeology remains underground we will never know about it. Will it be destroyed by the tunnel (or by a cutting)? No, it will be carefully excavated, documented, and stored in museums for future academic research. Try researching artefacts premanently buried 2m underground.
    We could outsource our infrastructure to the Northern Irish, who seem to have no trouble running a publicly-owned railway system which runs on time and is cheap.
    Probably helps to have: No government, massive subsidy from across the Irish sea and a place the size of a banana.
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,813
    edited December 2023

    Was lockdown necessary? I am not even sure at this point if it was, having been a strong advocate of it at the time.

    Grudgingly my view is yes, at least for the first lockdown, because I am pretty convinced the NHS would have come close to near total collapse (or even might have done so) if not, which would have had significantly worse outcomes than if not.

    Subsequent lockdowns, I am on the fence somewhat. The government fluctuated between being over zealous, and other times coming up with weird halfway house measures that didn’t work.

    One thing I do bemoan is that there was (and still is, in many mainstream media outlets) a complete lack of cost-benefit debate in our national conversation. The decision has been taken that lockdown = good and there was very little critical consideration of that in society at large, which has not been of benefit to us in my view - it has continued the trend towards polarisation/absolutist thinking/feelings of exclusion and disillusionment.

  • algarkirk said:

    Probably helps to have: No government, massive subsidy from across the Irish sea and a place the size of a banana.

    So what you are saying, is that even without a functioning government, they still have lower subsidies than the UK rail system and still manage to make it cheaper and work better than the privatised system here which has subsidies far higher than British Rail ever had and is far fragmented, slow and unreliable than ever.

    Let's get the Northern Irish in. Or even the French.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,549
    edited December 2023

    Was lockdown necessary? I am not even sure at this point if it was, having been a strong advocate of it at the time.

    I still don't understand why it was applied to young and healthy people when they were hardly affected by the virus. People who had to work with vulnerable people, like care home workers, had to work anyway, so the argument that it was the right thing to do in order to protect them doesn't hold water.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,805

    Meanwhile, in Scotland Carry on Sterilising

    Doctors will be given approval to keep prescribing puberty-blocking drugs to young people under plans to standardise gender identification services in Scotland.

    NHS England announced last year that hormone treatments would be prescribed to children only as part of clinical research after a report said that there were “gaps in evidence” on their safety and effectiveness.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/puberty-blockers-trans-youth-scotland-gbdj869h0

    Are the criminal courts not busy enough? Madness, bordering on evil.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    HYUFD said:

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It's terrible only because it isn't working.

    If it was in force, and effective, then 60%+ of the populace would be supportive of it with only a small voluble liberal minority crying murder about it.

    Even if it worked (it won't, it doesn't, it can't) it would still be terrible.

    But you are right, fewer people would care.
    In your eyes, yes, just as some don't like Australia's approach. But, it would become established and generally accepted.

    Also, more European countries would emulate it.
    Do you have any evidence that the idea is well supported outside a Tory/UKIP rump of extreme right wingers and racists?
    More support it (48%) than oppose (35%):

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/11/14/30390/2
    Big political divide though.

    77% of Conservative voters support processing asylum claims in Rwanda, as do 75% of Leave voters.

    61% of Labour voters, 59% of LD voters and 58% of Remainers don't however
    Surely we need to cancel the GE and declare martial law to support Rishi and the Rwanda plan. We can't have traitors running the show!
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,805

    Young people have been utterly screwed by this government on Covid and the aftermath, utterly screwed.

    It's something to which almost no attention is paid anywhere else other than here but the evidence is overwhelming.

    Their education and social development was horrendously damaged, even although they were at almost no risk at all of serious illness.
    They were harassed about meeting up with friends (unlike some politicians who seemed to carry on as normal).
    Their activities, such as night clubs, were specifically targeted and many failed to survive.
    They get to pay back the £400bn.

    The intergenerational fairness of such measures really needs looking at.
  • If Rwanda was a deterrent it would already be you know, deterring people.

    But it isn't.

    So it fails on its own terms, why is this not being more widely spoken about?
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,405
    Andy_JS said:

    Was lockdown necessary? I am not even sure at this point if it was, having been a strong advocate of it at the time.

    I still don't understand why it was applied to young and healthy people when they were hardly affected by the virus. People who had to work with vulnerable people, like care home workers, had to work anyway, so the argument that it was the right thing to do in order to protect them doesn't hold water.
    BIB is complete bollocks though, isn't it? Lots of young healthy people needed hospital care and many died from Covid in the era before vaccination. And lockdown was not about shielding the elderly and infirm it was about reducing the R to below 1 so that the prevalance dropped.

    The idea that young people could be allowed out, and older ones not falls apart when you look at workplaces, homes etc. Young people often live with older people and people who are vulnerable.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,405

    If Rwanda was a deterrent it would already be you know, deterring people.

    But it isn't.

    So it fails on its own terms, why is this not being more widely spoken about?

    Why would it be a deterrent when it is not in place?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067

    "As I have changed my phones, the messages wouldn't have come across."

    Rishi Sunak's words.

    Unless you specifically choose not to bring the messages across, they always come across.

    I think folk will just presume he’s lying. Most folks have WhatsApp. Most folks have upgraded phones. So they will know how simple it is to migrate to a new phone and keep all their chats.

    But I guess he knows this but what are his options? Stick with idea that he’s a clutz with tech that everyone thinks is fishy. Or say he took steps to erase his past text messages? I guess it is probably better to have folks thinking there is a cover up rather than them knowing there was.

    Personally, I don’t think he’s as good at tech as he thinks he is and can well believe he’s lost them accidentally. However, what still staggers me more is that they are conducting Government business over texts - what’s more WhatsApp. And this is somehow acceptable. It is not. I can’t understand why the civil service, security services or even the ICO haven’t / didn’t kick up more of a stink about this.

    Even the banks have been fined handsomely for doing that sort of thing.
    Because ministers are covered by the Ministerial Code - of which the PM is the final arbiter.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,984
    One of the best articles on lockdowns and authoritarianism.

    https://renewal.org.uk/lockdowns-moral-mission-creep/

    Reposted by Marie Le Conte today.

    "One of the most astute observations I saw made over the course of the pandemic was that much public discussion about the virus rested on the unspoken contention that covid-19 is transmitted not by close person to person contact, primarily in under-ventilated spaces, but by individual failure: by self indulgence, and by sin."
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,549
    "Commuter attacked by suspected XL Bully on train platform
    Footage shows the man trying to get a large dog under control before being thrown to the ground"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/11/man-attacked-suspected-xl-bully-stratford-train-station/
  • If Rwanda was a deterrent it would already be you know, deterring people.

    But it isn't.

    So it fails on its own terms, why is this not being more widely spoken about?

    Why would it be a deterrent when it is not in place?
    The announcement was the deterrent, I remember reading it at the time and thinking it was nonsense but that is what the government said.

    If you're going to die anyway why do you care? That's what these muppets don't seem to understand. They got rid of the Albanian people and the numbers are still coming.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,549
    Tim Stanley in the Telegraph.

    "Nigel Farage can put this pointless Conservative Party out of its misery
    The Tories warned that Labour would open the borders and raise taxes, then did it themselves. They deserve to go"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/10/nigel-farage-rishi-sunak-leadership-challenge
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,984

    If Rwanda was a deterrent it would already be you know, deterring people.

    But it isn't.

    So it fails on its own terms, why is this not being more widely spoken about?

    I think its advocates would say it can't be a deterrent until it's actually working. I can't see it becoming a meaningful deterrent even if it ever actually gets off the ground, because the capacity of Rwanda to take significant numbers is so constrained anyway. But it seems doubtful it'll ever get off the ground anyway.
  • My mortgage has just gone to its new interest rate. Up £155 a month. Thank you, Tories!
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,989
    @SamCoatesSky

    Mark Francois urges government to pull the bill

    “It might be better to start again”
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067

    If Rwanda was a deterrent it would already be you know, deterring people.

    But it isn't.

    So it fails on its own terms, why is this not being more widely spoken about?

    Why would it be a deterrent when it is not in place?
    Why would it be a deterrent in the (somewhat unlikely) event of its ever being in place ?
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,989
    @BethRigby

    And David Jones, ERG deputy chair, said he doesn’t think the bill amendable in its current form, as he explains why they want bill pulled. So position hardening.
  • Scott_xP said:

    @SamCoatesSky

    Mark Francois urges government to pull the bill

    “It might be better to start again”

    I feel a deep sense of shame that I agree with Mark Francois.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067
    The Pro-Putin Caucus: Republican Senator Vance says Ukraine may have to cede land to Russia to end war
    https://twitter.com/New_Narrative/status/1734184160699552167

    And would Vance, having voted to sell them out to Putin, then commit to defending Ukraine's thereby truncated territory ?
    Of course not.

    Putin doesn’t sound like a man who’s interested in a negotiated peace in Ukraine:

    “They’re running out [of weapons]… They don’t have anything, they have no future. But we do have a future.”

    (This is a newly released clip from his Kremlin awards ceremony for troops on Friday)

    https://twitter.com/francis_scarr/status/1733826361897136303

    JD Vance - along with a significant chunk of the GOP - advocates for war criminals.



  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,984
    Scott_xP said:

    @SamCoatesSky

    Mark Francois urges government to pull the bill

    “It might be better to start again”

    This is like Brexit all over again. Unlike Brexit, the non-Tories just need to sit this one out and let the policy collapse into its own contradictions. Not allow themselves to be actively associated with killing the policy otherwise it will become in popular Tory mythology the silver bullet that would have stopped the boats overnight were it not for those pesky lefty lawyers.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,727

    My mortgage has just gone to its new interest rate. Up £155 a month. Thank you, Tories!

    ~£260 for us at current rates but we've got two parts, smaller due Feb 2025 and larger due Dec 2025 so I'm hopeful that will drop a bit before then under the strong and steady leadership of Keir Starmer rather than chaos with Rishi Sunak :wink: Unless the fekker clings on so that we have to remortgage the first part under the chaos of a zombie government and a general election.

    The cheap money couldn't last forever, but it is unfortunate that that cheap money, by making larger mortgages 'affordable'*, helped to push up property prices to the extent that more realistic rates are now making things painful.

    * the affordability tests are interesting as we've always been offered Agreement in Principle amounts far in excess of what we consider we could afford to service
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,727
    TimS said:

    One of the best articles on lockdowns and authoritarianism.

    https://renewal.org.uk/lockdowns-moral-mission-creep/

    Reposted by Marie Le Conte today.

    "One of the most astute observations I saw made over the course of the pandemic was that much public discussion about the virus rested on the unspoken contention that covid-19 is transmitted not by close person to person contact, primarily in under-ventilated spaces, but by individual failure: by self indulgence, and by sin."

    But surely failure to observe Covid guidance was individual failure, self indulgence and sin? :wink:

    Now, if only the guidance had been more closely related to risk of infection, then those failings could also be linked to Covid transmission...

  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,727

    Scott_xP said:

    @SamCoatesSky

    Mark Francois urges government to pull the bill

    “It might be better to start again”

    I feel a deep sense of shame that I agree with Mark Francois.
    It might be better to pull the bill and then not start again!
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,372

    My mortgage has just gone to its new interest rate. Up £155 a month. Thank you, Tories!

    On the plus side savings rates are up too. 👍

    You’ve benefitted from ZIRP, that’s over now. I suspect we are reverting to long term rates now. I’d look at Mark Carney for someone to have a fair share of the blame.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,138
    Andy_JS said:

    Tim Stanley in the Telegraph.

    "Nigel Farage can put this pointless Conservative Party out of its misery
    The Tories warned that Labour would open the borders and raise taxes, then did it themselves. They deserve to go"

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/12/10/nigel-farage-rishi-sunak-leadership-challenge

    There was a fascinating moment in the jungle when contestants Tony Bellew and Josie Gibson interrogated Farage about his views and were surprised to learn that he doesn’t sit in the Commons. Later, Gibson said: “I had no idea he used to work for the European Parliament … It just goes to show how ignorant I’ve been!” Gibson is a presenter for ITV’s This Morning.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 37,347
    Nigelb said:

    The Pro-Putin Caucus: Republican Senator Vance says Ukraine may have to cede land to Russia to end war
    https://twitter.com/New_Narrative/status/1734184160699552167

    And would Vance, having voted to sell them out to Putin, then commit to defending Ukraine's thereby truncated territory ?
    Of course not.

    Putin doesn’t sound like a man who’s interested in a negotiated peace in Ukraine:

    “They’re running out [of weapons]… They don’t have anything, they have no future. But we do have a future.”

    (This is a newly released clip from his Kremlin awards ceremony for troops on Friday)

    https://twitter.com/francis_scarr/status/1733826361897136303

    JD Vance - along with a significant chunk of the GOP - advocates for war criminals.

    The GOP, with exceptions, has become disgusting. Like Hitler’s foreign admirers in the 1930’s, they see Putin’s Russia as a blueprint.

  • Not usually a fan of James O’Brien but this 💯 % spot on

    Ah. Mark François is back on the telly. It’s like finding shit on your shoe.

    https://x.com/mrjamesob/status/1734214506224476187?s=46
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,275

    HYUFD said:

    RobD said:

    Roger said:

    Scott_xP said:

    It's terrible only because it isn't working.

    If it was in force, and effective, then 60%+ of the populace would be supportive of it with only a small voluble liberal minority crying murder about it.

    Even if it worked (it won't, it doesn't, it can't) it would still be terrible.

    But you are right, fewer people would care.
    In your eyes, yes, just as some don't like Australia's approach. But, it would become established and generally accepted.

    Also, more European countries would emulate it.
    Do you have any evidence that the idea is well supported outside a Tory/UKIP rump of extreme right wingers and racists?
    More support it (48%) than oppose (35%):

    https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2023/11/14/30390/2
    Big political divide though.

    77% of Conservative voters support processing asylum claims in Rwanda, as do 75% of Leave voters.

    61% of Labour voters, 59% of LD voters and 58% of Remainers don't however
    Surely we need to cancel the GE and declare martial law to support Rishi and the Rwanda plan. We can't have traitors running the show!
    It’s pitiful . Did you see him begging for Labour support in the DE . When he came in even though I’d never vote for him I was relieved after the Bozo and Truss debacles . Now he’s just another liar who has zero spine and is being held hostage by the right wing nutjobs .
  • numbertwelvenumbertwelve Posts: 6,813
    edited December 2023
    So, basically, it doesn’t work. Colour us all shocked.

    Has to be a high likelihood that the government will pull the bill tonight?

    Im starting to think the routes for Rishi are narrowing, and an early 2024 election might now be the only way out.
  • So, basically, it doesn’t work. Colour us all shocked.

    Has to be a high likelihood that the government will pull the bill tonight?

    Im starting to think the routes for Rishi are narrowing, and an early 2024 election might now be the only way out.
    Can’t call a get Rwanda done election if the Tory ERG mobs are the ones that have stymied the plan.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,708
    isam said:

    New Dutch study on the economic impact of immigration demo-demo.nl/wp-content/upl… migration from other rich countries a net benefit, migration from poor countries a net drain


    https://x.com/edwest/status/1734122125013782708?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q

    This should be required reading for our policy makers and officials in the Home Office.
    Nick Palmer noted one small part of the report ("table on page 90 and the subsequent discussion") to draw his own slanted conclusions.
    I've now skim-read it in full and would just note its concluding sentence:

    The calculations in this report leave no doubt about what this means in the long term: increasing pressure on public finances and ultimately the end of the welfare state as we know it today. A choice for the current legal framework is therefore implicitly a choice against the welfare state.

  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,984

    So, basically, it doesn’t work. Colour us all shocked.

    Has to be a high likelihood that the government will pull the bill tonight?

    Im starting to think the routes for Rishi are narrowing, and an early 2024 election might now be the only way out.
    Can’t call a get Rwanda done election if the Tory ERG mobs are the ones that have stymied the plan.
    Well that didn't stop them doing a get Brexit done election.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,188
    Have to say am surprised that the ERG looks as if though it might vote down the Rwanda bill. This looks like remainers voting down the May Brexit bill type error to me, but the other way round. The ERG isn't going to get anything if they vote this down.
  • nico679nico679 Posts: 6,275
    TimS said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @SamCoatesSky

    Mark Francois urges government to pull the bill

    “It might be better to start again”

    This is like Brexit all over again. Unlike Brexit, the non-Tories just need to sit this one out and let the policy collapse into its own contradictions. Not allow themselves to be actively associated with killing the policy otherwise it will become in popular Tory mythology the silver bullet that would have stopped the boats overnight were it not for those pesky lefty lawyers.
    Labour have little to lose in sticking two fingers up at Sunak and his delusional Bill . They’ve already said they’d ditch the Rwanda plan if they came into office . The only way the Bill gets the nutjob seal of approval is if it breaks international law . The moderates then won’t support it and it has little chance of passing the HOL .
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,188
    Selebian said:

    My mortgage has just gone to its new interest rate. Up £155 a month. Thank you, Tories!

    ~£260 for us at current rates but we've got two parts, smaller due Feb 2025 and larger due Dec 2025 so I'm hopeful that will drop a bit before then under the strong and steady leadership of Keir Starmer rather than chaos with Rishi Sunak :wink: Unless the fekker clings on so that we have to remortgage the first part under the chaos of a zombie government and a general election.

    The cheap money couldn't last forever, but it is unfortunate that that cheap money, by making larger mortgages 'affordable'*, helped to push up property prices to the extent that more realistic rates are now making things painful.

    * the affordability tests are interesting as we've always been offered Agreement in Principle amounts far in excess of what we consider we could afford to service
    I think we got AIPed for about 300k on a joint income of 70k odd when I last remortgaged. Madness.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,051

    Two general thoughts on pandemics: First, globalization and diversity make them more likely; density makes them more deadly. These are not new observations, but it surprises me a bit to see how few pay attention to these lessons from history.

    (I would agree that all three are, net, still "good things", though all of them can be overdone.)

    Second, if I were running an inquiry, I would begin by studying the differences in other nations (or in the US among states). For example, why did Austria have so much lower a death rate than its neighbor, the Czech Republic?

    It is often easier to learn from other's experience than from our own.

    (Those interested in this subject may want to read Bill Gates' book. I found it sensible and liked the fact that he was looking for ways to improve, not people to blame.)

    Yes, you want a comparative approach. But perhaps to do a comparative approach well, you need to start with a very detailed look at the approach taken within each country, and maybe the Inquiry provides that for here (as other country’s inquiries will for those countries)?

  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,984

    So, basically, it doesn’t work. Colour us all shocked.

    Has to be a high likelihood that the government will pull the bill tonight?

    Im starting to think the routes for Rishi are narrowing, and an early 2024 election might now be the only way out.
    Say what you like about the ERG, they're extremely good at making themselves the most important people in the room with an effective veto on anything the government does. The way they seem to achieve this is threefold:

    - They really do manage to vote as a bloc, more so than any of the other looser groupings in the party
    - They invent all these very impressive sounding structures (including the ERG itself), the latest being this "star chamber", which give a veneer of expertise and authority to anything they decide
    - They usually follow through on their threats. Unlike others such as the one nation caucus, they have a track record of voting against the government which means everyone has to take their threats seriously

    For all that people across the political spectrum from the staff of most news outlets other than the Mail and Telegraph to Dominic Cummings think they're a bunch of past-it numpties, they still seem to manage to operate as a kind of RMT of the commons.
  • DavidL said:

    Meanwhile, in Scotland Carry on Sterilising

    Doctors will be given approval to keep prescribing puberty-blocking drugs to young people under plans to standardise gender identification services in Scotland.

    NHS England announced last year that hormone treatments would be prescribed to children only as part of clinical research after a report said that there were “gaps in evidence” on their safety and effectiveness.


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/puberty-blockers-trans-youth-scotland-gbdj869h0

    Are the criminal courts not busy enough? Madness, bordering on evil.
    I suspect it will be the Civil Courts in the US that bring this to a juddering halt (for those jurisdictions not following the evidence...)
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,051

    Sat in a meeting this morning. People from various parts of the UK saying they are done with rail travel. Endless repeated major delays and cancellations mean they just aren't reliable enough to be trusted.

    The problem with the UK rail system is that not only it is expensive, it is unreliable too.

    If it was expensive but Swiss-style, I think people would tolerate it. But they don't, because it isn't.

    France's system might not be better in actuality, same as Germany's (haven't seen the recent figures but I believe long-form services are more unreliable in those countries but short-form services are more reliable) but they aren't spending £300 to get from Berlin to Hamburg
    Japanese “bullet” trains are cheaper, more frequent, more reliable, quicker and nicer than UK trains… buuuuuuut that’s on the back of a lot of public investment years ago.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,051
    Andy_JS said:

    Was lockdown necessary? I am not even sure at this point if it was, having been a strong advocate of it at the time.

    I still don't understand why it was applied to young and healthy people when they were hardly affected by the virus. People who had to work with vulnerable people, like care home workers, had to work anyway, so the argument that it was the right thing to do in order to protect them doesn't hold water.
    Because the less vulnerable will still spread the virus. The vulnerable people catch the virus from someone who isn’t vulnerable, so to protect the vulnerable, you need to keep levels of infection manageable throughout the population.
  • SelebianSelebian Posts: 8,727
    In a rare defence of Sunak, while I don't think EOTHO was a good idea (and didn't think so at the time) I do think he was perfectly justified, in his role as Chancellor, to push it for its economic benefits. It was up to SAGE,* the Health Secretary and - indeed - the PM to push against it if needed and (for the PM) veto it if required. The ministers, broadly, should be pushing the interests of the area under their care and the PM's job is to balance those competing priorities.

    * had they been consulted, which appears not to have been the case
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,051
    DavidL said:

    Young people have been utterly screwed by this government on Covid and the aftermath, utterly screwed.

    It's something to which almost no attention is paid anywhere else other than here but the evidence is overwhelming.

    Their education and social development was horrendously damaged, even although they were at almost no risk at all of serious illness.
    They were harassed about meeting up with friends (unlike some politicians who seemed to carry on as normal).
    Their activities, such as night clubs, were specifically targeted and many failed to survive.
    They get to pay back the £400bn.

    The intergenerational fairness of such measures really needs looking at.
    The matter has been extensively discussed in the media. The right-leaning media were constantly going on about the ills of lockdowns.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,067
    This is only a rough draft of a work in progress, but it looks worth pursuing.

    Has some unflattering first reflections on UK defence procurement.

    (Benaich was one of the driving forces behind the government's reformed University business spin out policy, which is one of the few things to Sunak's credit.)

    Bringing Dynamism to European Defense: a new report
    https://www.airstreet.com/blog/european-defense-procurement
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,748

    Andy_JS said:

    Was lockdown necessary? I am not even sure at this point if it was, having been a strong advocate of it at the time.

    I still don't understand why it was applied to young and healthy people when they were hardly affected by the virus. People who had to work with vulnerable people, like care home workers, had to work anyway, so the argument that it was the right thing to do in order to protect them doesn't hold water.
    Because the less vulnerable will still spread the virus. The vulnerable people catch the virus from someone who isn’t vulnerable, so to protect the vulnerable, you need to keep levels of infection manageable throughout the population.
    I suspect you're wasting your breath. If people can't understand something very simple when it's explained to them 100 times, the probability of success at the 101st attempt is not high.
  • "As I have changed my phones, the messages wouldn't have come across."

    Rishi Sunak's words.

    Unless you specifically choose not to bring the messages across, they always come across.

    I think folk will just presume he’s lying. Most folks have WhatsApp. Most folks have upgraded phones. So they will know how simple it is to migrate to a new phone and keep all their chats.

    But I guess he knows this but what are his options? Stick with idea that he’s a clutz with tech that everyone thinks is fishy. Or say he took steps to erase his past text messages? I guess it is probably better to have folks thinking there is a cover up rather than them knowing there was.

    Personally, I don’t think he’s as good at tech as he thinks he is and can well believe he’s lost them accidentally. However, what still staggers me more is that they are conducting Government business over texts - what’s more WhatsApp. And this is somehow acceptable. It is not. I can’t understand why the civil service, security services or even the ICO haven’t / didn’t kick up more of a stink about this.

    Even the banks have been fined handsomely for doing that sort of thing.

    As someone who is entirely non-technical and of a similar age, I can kind of get Boris Johnson not understanding WhatsApp, even though I am pretty sure he has lied about it. Rishi Sunak? Not a chance. His a forty-something tech bro. There is not a snowball's chance in hell he does not know how it all works.

  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,051
    “ Sunak gave some insight into the demands of the job, saying he saw Boris Johnson "more often than I saw my own wife"”

    Boris, of course, has a long history of “seeing” people more than his own (then) wife.
  • "As I have changed my phones, the messages wouldn't have come across."

    Rishi Sunak's words.

    Unless you specifically choose not to bring the messages across, they always come across.

    I think folk will just presume he’s lying. Most folks have WhatsApp. Most folks have upgraded phones. So they will know how simple it is to migrate to a new phone and keep all their chats.

    But I guess he knows this but what are his options? Stick with idea that he’s a clutz with tech that everyone thinks is fishy. Or say he took steps to erase his past text messages? I guess it is probably better to have folks thinking there is a cover up rather than them knowing there was.

    Personally, I don’t think he’s as good at tech as he thinks he is and can well believe he’s lost them accidentally. However, what still staggers me more is that they are conducting Government business over texts - what’s more WhatsApp. And this is somehow acceptable. It is not. I can’t understand why the civil service, security services or even the ICO haven’t / didn’t kick up more of a stink about this.

    Even the banks have been fined handsomely for doing that sort of thing.

    As someone who is entirely non-technical and of a similar age, I can kind of get Boris Johnson not understanding WhatsApp, even though I am pretty sure he has lied about it. Rishi Sunak? Not a chance. His a forty-something tech bro. There is not a snowball's chance in hell he does not know how it all works.

    The same Rishi Sunak who could not work a contactless card payment in his petrol station photo-op? I can easily believe he does not know the ins and outs of WhatsApp. Rishi also wears glasses but only part of the time, so it may well be that he cannot see his Smartphone screen well enough to want to use apps.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,989
    @SamCoatesSky

    Some Tory MPs claim colleagues threatened with an early election if they vote down the bill

    But a number are sceptical No10 would follow through.

    One told me they’re minded to vote against providing they can answer the question how this wouldn’t be curtains for Rishi Sunak
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,984

    Sat in a meeting this morning. People from various parts of the UK saying they are done with rail travel. Endless repeated major delays and cancellations mean they just aren't reliable enough to be trusted.

    The problem with the UK rail system is that not only it is expensive, it is unreliable too.

    If it was expensive but Swiss-style, I think people would tolerate it. But they don't, because it isn't.

    France's system might not be better in actuality, same as Germany's (haven't seen the recent figures but I believe long-form services are more unreliable in those countries but short-form services are more reliable) but they aren't spending £300 to get from Berlin to Hamburg
    Japanese “bullet” trains are cheaper, more frequent, more reliable, quicker and nicer than UK trains… buuuuuuut that’s on the back of a lot of public investment years ago.
    And limited to non-existent planning restrictions. The trains just bomb through built up areas and countryside on prominent high speed rail lines with none of your tunnelling through suburbs, protecting ancient woodland, avoiding ponds with rare newts or preserving views immortalised in literature. Not that this is an approach we could realistically adopt in the UK, and the Japanese cityscape is by and large pretty ugly as a result of their approach to planning, but it certainly would have made construction a lot simpler and cheaper.
  • I see the PB Libz masturbated themselves into a feverish frenzy over Rwanda earlier this morning.

    Unedifying but wholly predictable.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,241

    Young people have been utterly screwed by this government on Covid and the aftermath, utterly screwed.

    Do ninjas have battery operated horses?
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,984
    Scott_xP said:

    @SamCoatesSky

    Some Tory MPs claim colleagues threatened with an early election if they vote down the bill

    But a number are sceptical No10 would follow through.

    One told me they’re minded to vote against providing they can answer the question how this wouldn’t be curtains for Rishi Sunak

    I wonder when Labour would ideally want an election. Next May perhaps. Not so soon that they're not caught on the hop without a full policy agenda and plans, not so long that the Tories can salt more tracts of earth ahead of losing.

    In any case the government can't call realistically an election now for the same reason they can't call one this time next year: campaigning would go over the Christmas break and piss off all the MPs and activists.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,989

    I see the PB Libz masturbated themselves into a feverish frenzy over Rwanda earlier this morning.

    Unedifying but wholly predictable.

    The ERG are frotting themselves into an early election
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,908
    Sean_F said:

    Nigelb said:

    The Pro-Putin Caucus: Republican Senator Vance says Ukraine may have to cede land to Russia to end war
    https://twitter.com/New_Narrative/status/1734184160699552167

    And would Vance, having voted to sell them out to Putin, then commit to defending Ukraine's thereby truncated territory ?
    Of course not.

    Putin doesn’t sound like a man who’s interested in a negotiated peace in Ukraine:

    “They’re running out [of weapons]… They don’t have anything, they have no future. But we do have a future.”

    (This is a newly released clip from his Kremlin awards ceremony for troops on Friday)

    https://twitter.com/francis_scarr/status/1733826361897136303

    JD Vance - along with a significant chunk of the GOP - advocates for war criminals.

    The GOP, with exceptions, has become disgusting. Like Hitler’s foreign admirers in the 1930’s, they see Putin’s Russia as a blueprint.

    Well to be fair even Trumpites have called for a ceasefire (much like Corbynites have in Gaza) not to actually send weapons and funds to Putin
This discussion has been closed.