Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
It's not just Europe now. They're a party-within-a-party and rejoicing in their pseudo-structures as such. Star Chambers and so on.
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
It is always a mystery why people like Sunak don't realise that there but for fortune they or their parents could be the very boat people he is trying to send to Rwanda.
I can understand some people feel very remote from people coming here for a better life or escaping from an unbearable one but for those just two or three generations from immigrants I find it baffling.
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
It's not just Europe now. They're a party-within-a-party and rejoicing in their pseudo-structures as such. Star Chambers and so on.
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
I would argue the issue is, in many ways, FPTP - if you have "safe seats" on 30-40% of the vote because there is no unified opposition, you end up with people who are frothing at the brain without anywhere near majority support, even in their own constituency. Put that together with 24 hour news cycles, and you have nutters who are incentivised to say the most ridiculous stuff because it gets them on TV and in headlines and therefore loved by those who care too much about politics and spend all their time online caring about politics (namely - us) when most people couldn't tell you who is in the cabinet.
Currently in the morning “government looks like it will loose” phase. To be followed by afternoon “intense negotiations, whips working the tea rooms” phase. Then the evening “Minister offers clarifications from despatch box” phase. And the 10.00 pm “Sunak squeaks through” phase.
Is there any aspect of the last 13 years of Conservative government that hasn't been an abysmal failure - even if held to their own standards? The idea that austerity meant we would have a stronger economy if bad things came our way - proven untrue with Brexit and Covid. The changes to the NHS have demonstrably worsened the service, not made it better. Infrastructure has been left to fall apart, and now (as everyone said at the time it would be) it has been concluded that their changes to education over the last decade have done more harm than good:
Can anyone point to a single success of the prevailing Conservative political hegemony since the coalition that hasn't turned into ash in their hands? Even many Brexiteers are unhappy with the outcomes of us leaving the EU; either because it isn't "real Brexit" or because there is a distinct lack of sunlit uplands!
Gay marriage tbf - and even that vitiated by the reactionary refusal to make the state church toe the line, I suppose.
Also, that passed thanks to opposition votes. More Labour MPs voted for it than Tory MPs, with less than half of Tories voting in favour - and the current Tory party far more represented in the No camp.
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
They've unearthed a Europe angle here too, haven't they. Previously immigration was a Europe issue because of FM. Now post Brexit immigration is still a Europe issue because of the ECHR. Leaving it seems to be the target. And if they manage that? Well they'll just find something else. The narrowness of the Channel perhaps. It means France is too close for comfort. Something will need to be done about that.
Currently in the morning “government looks like it will loose” phase. To be followed by afternoon “intense negotiations, whips working the tea rooms” phase. Then the evening “Minister offers clarifications from despatch box” phase. And the 10.00 pm “Sunak squeaks through” phase.
Such a triumph of Sunak's visionary leadership and his ability to take on the tough issues. Pass the sick bucket.
Is there any aspect of the last 13 years of Conservative government that hasn't been an abysmal failure - even if held to their own standards? The idea that austerity meant we would have a stronger economy if bad things came our way - proven untrue with Brexit and Covid. The changes to the NHS have demonstrably worsened the service, not made it better. Infrastructure has been left to fall apart, and now (as everyone said at the time it would be) it has been concluded that their changes to education over the last decade have done more harm than good:
Can anyone point to a single success of the prevailing Conservative political hegemony since the coalition that hasn't turned into ash in their hands? Even many Brexiteers are unhappy with the outcomes of us leaving the EU; either because it isn't "real Brexit" or because there is a distinct lack of sunlit uplands!
This 100x. They've run the country into the ground. I'm not even sure it's salvageable.
Is there any aspect of the last 13 years of Conservative government that hasn't been an abysmal failure - even if held to their own standards? The idea that austerity meant we would have a stronger economy if bad things came our way - proven untrue with Brexit and Covid. The changes to the NHS have demonstrably worsened the service, not made it better. Infrastructure has been left to fall apart, and now (as everyone said at the time it would be) it has been concluded that their changes to education over the last decade have done more harm than good:
Can anyone point to a single success of the prevailing Conservative political hegemony since the coalition that hasn't turned into ash in their hands? Even many Brexiteers are unhappy with the outcomes of us leaving the EU; either because it isn't "real Brexit" or because there is a distinct lack of sunlit uplands!
Gay marriage tbf - and even that vitiated by the reactionary refusal to make the state church toe the line, I suppose.
Also, that passed thanks to opposition votes. More Labour MPs voted for it than Tory MPs, with less than half of Tories voting in favour - and the current Tory party far more represented in the No camp.
Technical note but Lib Dems were government-party MPs then, not opposition.
Not that that matters in the sense of what Tory MPs did.
One Nation Tories also set to meet the PM later...
(But why)
Sunak making promises to everyone that he can’t keep . Probably offered concessions to the nutjobs which breach international law and this has now pissed off the One Nation Tories .
The media are bigging up the drama but for once I agree with Dan Hodges .
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
It's not just Europe now. They're a party-within-a-party and rejoicing in their pseudo-structures as such. Star Chambers and so on.
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
However in the longer run I do not believe that a bill is capable of being drafted, even if on paper it satisfied the ERG etc, which will successfully and sufficiently for them oust the jurisdiction of the courts. It just cannot be done in a constitutional democracy.
A lot of non lawyers seem to think law is all done in discrete and reliable fragments. It isn't. Its an organic structure 800 years old and there is an awful lot of it. All new laws are relatable to the whole of pre existing law.
Starmer's point this morning that at most this deals with about 100 people while 160,000 or some such figure have not yet been processed becomes a bit of a killer once attention turns that way.
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
It's not just Europe now. They're a party-within-a-party and rejoicing in their pseudo-structures as such. Star Chambers and so on.
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
I would argue the issue is, in many ways, FPTP - if you have "safe seats" on 30-40% of the vote because there is no unified opposition, you end up with people who are frothing at the brain without anywhere near majority support, even in their own constituency. Put that together with 24 hour news cycles, and you have nutters who are incentivised to say the most ridiculous stuff because it gets them on TV and in headlines and therefore loved by those who care too much about politics and spend all their time online caring about politics (namely - us) when most people couldn't tell you who is in the cabinet.
Much as I favour PR, FPTP does keep most nutcases of left and right out of parliament. BxP was polling a steady low-double-digit share under Johnson, before the election. The dynamics of FPTP (including the Brexit Party opting out of standing in many seats), ended up squeezing that down to 2% on polling day but under PR, those dynamics wouldn't have been anything like as intense and it's entirely plausible that the previous share would have maintained, as in 2015 - resulting in 60-80 Brexit Party MPs.
In reality, the issue is less the electoral system but the system of selection, which plays to the prejudices of party members and only then to the public (not least because an individual candidate's views matter very little in terms of influencing the public's vote, especially when not already an MP with a record).
And PR tends to put more power into the hands of parties rather than less. STV (not technically PR) and open lists can answer that question; both are systems rarely used across the world.
The role of luck is immensely underrated. Being in the right place at the right time and then meeting the right people when you are decide so many lives. Mine, for sure.
To have been born in North London in the 1960s to two aspirational working class parents was to have been born as a window had just been opened and before it was shut again. I am not sure there will ever be a luckier generation than mine.
I reckon I was luckier than that. 12 years ago, in a chance conversation with a mate who'd just got a new job, I said, entirely in jest, "you'd better get me a job there, sounds like my sort of place". He decided to have a word with his boss, and I got a call a week or so later asking if I'd come down for an interview.
It seems I was correct about it being my sort of place - I did a management buyout in 2021, and it's now my business. It's not a massive enterprise; I currently employ 4 people, but it means I actually get to do something I enjoy, and get paid for it.
Lots of talks going on behind the scenes as Tory rebels weigh up going nuclear and voting the bill down today, or biding their time and trying to amend.
New Conservatives holding more meetings later today….after their breakfast summit with PM this morning
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
It's not just Europe now. They're a party-within-a-party and rejoicing in their pseudo-structures as such. Star Chambers and so on.
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
I would argue the issue is, in many ways, FPTP - if you have "safe seats" on 30-40% of the vote because there is no unified opposition, you end up with people who are frothing at the brain without anywhere near majority support, even in their own constituency. Put that together with 24 hour news cycles, and you have nutters who are incentivised to say the most ridiculous stuff because it gets them on TV and in headlines and therefore loved by those who care too much about politics and spend all their time online caring about politics (namely - us) when most people couldn't tell you who is in the cabinet.
Much as I favour PR, FPTP does keep most nutcases of left and right out of parliament. BxP was polling a steady low-double-digit share under Johnson, before the election. The dynamics of FPTP (including the Brexit Party opting out of standing in many seats), ended up squeezing that down to 2% on polling day but under PR, those dynamics wouldn't have been anything like as intense and it's entirely plausible that the previous share would have maintained, as in 2015 - resulting in 60-80 Brexit Party MPs.
In reality, the issue is less the electoral system but the system of selection, which plays to the prejudices of party members and only then to the public (not least because an individual candidate's views matter very little in terms of influencing the public's vote, especially when not already an MP with a record).
And PR tends to put more power into the hands of parties rather than less. STV (not technically PR) and open lists can answer that question; both are systems rarely used across the world.
FPTP promotes parties with a minority of the votes getting majorities to govern - this gives outweighted power to the governing party and demands that parties hold together even if they (ideologically) should split or die. Governing since the Brexit referendum has mostly about the survival of the Tory party as an entity, or the PMs position within the party - not about leading the country. PR might give more representation to fringe parties, but they would have less power overall - because they would have to work in coalition with other parties to govern. I think the same issue is true for the Labour party, tbh - they need to split and FPTP and ABC voting is the only thing keeping them as a single party.
Thanks for the comments. For the avoidance of doubt I think Sunak is probably well above average intelligence, a hard-working achiever, and a generally decent person (if deeply misguided on many issues imo).
What he lacks in buckets is judgement and emotional intelligence.
Which begs a question for PB's IQ expert: what's the point of an IQ or 163 if you lack judgement?
The red flag is his lack of awareness of using his chopper all the time.
That he doesn't realise it reinforces every stereotype about him makes me wonder.
It is always a mystery why people like Sunak don't realise that there but for fortune they or their parents could be the very boat people he is trying to send to Rwanda.
I can understand some people feel very remote from people coming here for a better life or escaping from an unbearable one but for those just two or three generations from immigrants I find it baffling.
"Pulling up the ladder" is in the Tory DNA. Hence people who benefited from plentiful, cheap housing denying that to their grand-children's generation.
Lots of talks going on behind the scenes as Tory rebels weigh up going nuclear and voting the bill down today, or biding their time and trying to amend.
New Conservatives holding more meetings later today….after their breakfast summit with PM this morning
They’re all attention seeking fuckwits ! Amending the bill to what they want would breach international law .
Mr. Jonathan, it might be, but from my own perspective I think the impact of luck varies a lot too. Some people do their best but are buggered by misfortune utterly unrelated to their actions or good character. Many work ahead and achieve success without any notable stroke of luck.
If you have good health or were born into a stable family in the West at the latter end of the 20th century you have won the lottery of life.
Especially if you are born in England. Because God (as Admiral Fisher* observed) is an Englishman.
*Fisher must have been one of the few people ever told by an Archbishop of Canterbury to attend church… less.
Eh? Geoffrey Fisher WAS the 99th Archbishop of Canterbury (1945 to 1961)
Two different Fisher´s: 1, Admiral Jacky Fisher (1841.1920) and 2, Archbishop Geoffrey Fisher (1887-1972) . Not related, so far as I know.
The role of luck is immensely underrated. Being in the right place at the right time and then meeting the right people when you are decide so many lives. Mine, for sure.
To have been born in North London in the 1960s to two aspirational working class parents was to have been born as a window had just been opened and before it was shut again. I am not sure there will ever be a luckier generation than mine.
I reckon I was luckier than that. 12 years ago, in a chance conversation with a mate who'd just got a new job, I said, entirely in jest, "you'd better get me a job there, sounds like my sort of place". He decided to have a word with his boss, and I got a call a week or so later asking if I'd come down for an interview.
It seems I was correct about it being my sort of place - I did a management buyout in 2021, and it's now my business. It's not a massive enterprise; I currently employ 4 people, but it means I actually get to do something I enjoy, and get paid for it.
The role of luck drives the politics of decent people wherever they are on the spectrum. About 25 babies will be born today in Gaza. Organising a world/state on the imagined basis that you do not know which baby you will be (which before you were born you didn't) drives towards adopting a minimum and decent standard for everyone. This is the great thought of genius John Rawls, political philosopher. Marks out of 10 so far? Could do better.
Lots of talks going on behind the scenes as Tory rebels weigh up going nuclear and voting the bill down today, or biding their time and trying to amend.
New Conservatives holding more meetings later today….after their breakfast summit with PM this morning
They’re all attention seeking fuckwits ! Amending the bill to what they want would breach international law .
They don't care about that.
More realistically, they should know that there isn't a cat-in-hell's chance that they can amend the Bill without govt support (and, indeed, the support of Tory MPs who do care about international law). But maybe they want the battle just in order to make the point?
Is there any aspect of the last 13 years of Conservative government that hasn't been an abysmal failure - even if held to their own standards? The idea that austerity meant we would have a stronger economy if bad things came our way - proven untrue with Brexit and Covid. The changes to the NHS have demonstrably worsened the service, not made it better. Infrastructure has been left to fall apart, and now (as everyone said at the time it would be) it has been concluded that their changes to education over the last decade have done more harm than good:
Can anyone point to a single success of the prevailing Conservative political hegemony since the coalition that hasn't turned into ash in their hands? Even many Brexiteers are unhappy with the outcomes of us leaving the EU; either because it isn't "real Brexit" or because there is a distinct lack of sunlit uplands!
This 100x. They've run the country into the ground. I'm not even sure it's salvageable.
What is remarkable is how many decisions that were made on the coalition years are now coming back to bite - both local government and the university sector are within months to 2 years facing total collapse.
The role of luck is immensely underrated. Being in the right place at the right time and then meeting the right people when you are decide so many lives. Mine, for sure.
To have been born in North London in the 1960s to two aspirational working class parents was to have been born as a window had just been opened and before it was shut again. I am not sure there will ever be a luckier generation than mine.
I reckon I was luckier than that. 12 years ago, in a chance conversation with a mate who'd just got a new job, I said, entirely in jest, "you'd better get me a job there, sounds like my sort of place". He decided to have a word with his boss, and I got a call a week or so later asking if I'd come down for an interview.
It seems I was correct about it being my sort of place - I did a management buyout in 2021, and it's now my business. It's not a massive enterprise; I currently employ 4 people, but it means I actually get to do something I enjoy, and get paid for it.
Not in the same league but I'd been long-term unemployed for 20 years before landing a job at a start-up which went bust, but from which a colleague recruited me to his next employer where I lasted another two decades and climbed a little way up the ladder till redundancy turned into retirement. And whilst I might live in a hovel, it is at least my own hovel thanks to occasionally backing the right horses, and even the right politicians while I'm aftertiming.
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
It's not just Europe now. They're a party-within-a-party and rejoicing in their pseudo-structures as such. Star Chambers and so on.
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
I would argue the issue is, in many ways, FPTP - if you have "safe seats" on 30-40% of the vote because there is no unified opposition, you end up with people who are frothing at the brain without anywhere near majority support, even in their own constituency. Put that together with 24 hour news cycles, and you have nutters who are incentivised to say the most ridiculous stuff because it gets them on TV and in headlines and therefore loved by those who care too much about politics and spend all their time online caring about politics (namely - us) when most people couldn't tell you who is in the cabinet.
Much as I favour PR, FPTP does keep most nutcases of left and right out of parliament. BxP was polling a steady low-double-digit share under Johnson, before the election. The dynamics of FPTP (including the Brexit Party opting out of standing in many seats), ended up squeezing that down to 2% on polling day but under PR, those dynamics wouldn't have been anything like as intense and it's entirely plausible that the previous share would have maintained, as in 2015 - resulting in 60-80 Brexit Party MPs.
In reality, the issue is less the electoral system but the system of selection, which plays to the prejudices of party members and only then to the public (not least because an individual candidate's views matter very little in terms of influencing the public's vote, especially when not already an MP with a record).
And PR tends to put more power into the hands of parties rather than less. STV (not technically PR) and open lists can answer that question; both are systems rarely used across the world.
FPTP promotes parties with a minority of the votes getting majorities to govern - this gives outweighted power to the governing party and demands that parties hold together even if they (ideologically) should split or die. Governing since the Brexit referendum has mostly about the survival of the Tory party as an entity, or the PMs position within the party - not about leading the country. PR might give more representation to fringe parties, but they would have less power overall - because they would have to work in coalition with other parties to govern. I think the same issue is true for the Labour party, tbh - they need to split and FPTP and ABC voting is the only thing keeping them as a single party.
And that assertion is consistent with PR in Israel, the French Fourth Republic or Italy, I suppose?
The power of fringe parties depends on their leverage in terms of the maths, and their willingness to use that leverage to make or break governments. I think it's a stretch to suggest that introducing 15-20% of nutcase MPs into the Commons would reduce their power - particularly in the current context with a vocal and active Tory right and the recent experience of a Labour party taken over by its hard left.
@lewisUTBdenison Hearing of a tragic incident on the Bibby Stockholm barge, involving the alleged death of an asylum seeker, according to someone living on the boat
Dorset Police has confirmed an incident has occurred and will be providing updates shortly
Is there any aspect of the last 13 years of Conservative government that hasn't been an abysmal failure - even if held to their own standards? The idea that austerity meant we would have a stronger economy if bad things came our way - proven untrue with Brexit and Covid. The changes to the NHS have demonstrably worsened the service, not made it better. Infrastructure has been left to fall apart, and now (as everyone said at the time it would be) it has been concluded that their changes to education over the last decade have done more harm than good:
Can anyone point to a single success of the prevailing Conservative political hegemony since the coalition that hasn't turned into ash in their hands? Even many Brexiteers are unhappy with the outcomes of us leaving the EU; either because it isn't "real Brexit" or because there is a distinct lack of sunlit uplands!
Gay marriage - and even that vitiated by the reactionary refusal to make the state church toe the line, I suppose.
Equal marriage was a rare positive reform by the coalition government, I will accept that. Although I've said before I think if it were suggested to today's Tory party (or their voters) it would be dismissed as "woke nonsense".
Also the original push for renewables.
While overall the last decade and a half's energy policy has been more than a bit of a mess (see, for example, the indecision, delays, and consequent cost escalation for nuclear), without that initial impetus (which included large subsidies for the development of onshore and then offshore wind), we'd be in a far worse position.
Some smaller items - for instance the investment in promising fusion technology.
The speedy response at the beginning of the Ukraine invasion.
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
It's not just Europe now. They're a party-within-a-party and rejoicing in their pseudo-structures as such. Star Chambers and so on.
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
That's why they need the biggest electoral kicking in their history.
FPTP not infrequently holds us hostage to such minority extremes on both left and right. Time for this bunch to face the consequences.
@Steven_Swinford Inside Rishi Sunak's No 10 breakfast with Tory right-wingers:
* Danny Kruger opened - he told the PM he had 3 options. Pull the bill, commit to making amendments in unequivocal terms from despatch box or refuse to make changes & people will vote against
* Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't pull bill but said he would consider 'tightening it up'
* Sunak said he had 'inherited' high levels of legal migration & small boats issues - this irked some of those present
* Jonathan Gullis said he & colleagues had heard nothing from whips office or home sec. Said it felt like no-one cared about their view
* Marco Longhi said there had been no meaningful engagement before publication of bill
* Nick Fletcher said govt needs to be more Tory and stop being socialists. The PM said he's a Tory, highlighted tax cuts
* Some already swayed by PM's offer to consider amendments - others think it's not serious
* PM, Will Tanner, Rupert Yorke & Craig Williams in room for govt - no sign of chief whip
As the Tories tear themselves apart over Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda plan, Keir Starmer says politics has become about “empty gestures of grandstanding” and “the moralising self-indulgence of those who think politics is a sermon about themselves”
Is there any aspect of the last 13 years of Conservative government that hasn't been an abysmal failure - even if held to their own standards? The idea that austerity meant we would have a stronger economy if bad things came our way - proven untrue with Brexit and Covid. The changes to the NHS have demonstrably worsened the service, not made it better. Infrastructure has been left to fall apart, and now (as everyone said at the time it would be) it has been concluded that their changes to education over the last decade have done more harm than good:
Can anyone point to a single success of the prevailing Conservative political hegemony since the coalition that hasn't turned into ash in their hands? Even many Brexiteers are unhappy with the outcomes of us leaving the EU; either because it isn't "real Brexit" or because there is a distinct lack of sunlit uplands!
This 100x. They've run the country into the ground. I'm not even sure it's salvageable.
What is remarkable is how many decisions that were made on the coalition years are now coming back to bite - both local government and the university sector are within months to 2 years facing total collapse.
It's what many people always said about austerity, though. There was a difference between managing the financial crisis and then using that moment as an opportunity for massive ideological destruction of state resources. That's what austerity did - it cut government spending to the bone. The LDs were not much of a "moderating" force given that the orange bookers were all for "unleashing the market" anyway - so it's no surprise to me that even the outcomes of the coalition government are showing weak foundations.
As someone who doesn't really like the existence of states and is certainly no fan of capitalism, I find it strange to often be the believer, if not defender, of state power to impact lives and prop up the capitalist system. Those who claim to want some unifying principle, some sense of identity and shared national understanding, refuse to allow the welfare state, well funded public education and healthcare to be that thing. When FDR brought in the New Deal he saved capitalism (from itself) and reinvigorated the United States; when we brought in the NHS we created, as many comment, the closest thing to a "secular religion" in Britain. And yet, out of practical harm reduction, I find myself arguing for state social democracy, which would inevitably involve capitalist markets (just somewhat restrained and regulated), and it is those who say they are care about nationhood and capitalism that argue for policies that sow the seeds of the destruction of both...
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
It's not just Europe now. They're a party-within-a-party and rejoicing in their pseudo-structures as such. Star Chambers and so on.
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
However in the longer run I do not believe that a bill is capable of being drafted, even if on paper it satisfied the ERG etc, which will successfully and sufficiently for them oust the jurisdiction of the courts. It just cannot be done in a constitutional democracy.
A lot of non lawyers seem to think law is all done in discrete and reliable fragments. It isn't. Its an organic structure 800 years old and there is an awful lot of it. All new laws are relatable to the whole of pre existing law.
Starmer's point this morning that at most this deals with about 100 people while 160,000 or some such figure have not yet been processed becomes a bit of a killer once attention turns that way.
Yes and no. That's only the case while it is. And the pivot point there is 'constitutional democracy'. Your point is essentially that removing the courts from the process of application of the law is inherently inconsistent with a constitutional democracy - and so it is. But parliament could do that anyway, if it wanted to.
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
It's not just Europe now. They're a party-within-a-party and rejoicing in their pseudo-structures as such. Star Chambers and so on.
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
I would argue the issue is, in many ways, FPTP - if you have "safe seats" on 30-40% of the vote because there is no unified opposition, you end up with people who are frothing at the brain without anywhere near majority support, even in their own constituency. Put that together with 24 hour news cycles, and you have nutters who are incentivised to say the most ridiculous stuff because it gets them on TV and in headlines and therefore loved by those who care too much about politics and spend all their time online caring about politics (namely - us) when most people couldn't tell you who is in the cabinet.
Much as I favour PR, FPTP does keep most nutcases of left and right out of parliament. BxP was polling a steady low-double-digit share under Johnson, before the election. The dynamics of FPTP (including the Brexit Party opting out of standing in many seats), ended up squeezing that down to 2% on polling day but under PR, those dynamics wouldn't have been anything like as intense and it's entirely plausible that the previous share would have maintained, as in 2015 - resulting in 60-80 Brexit Party MPs.
In reality, the issue is less the electoral system but the system of selection, which plays to the prejudices of party members and only then to the public (not least because an individual candidate's views matter very little in terms of influencing the public's vote, especially when not already an MP with a record).
And PR tends to put more power into the hands of parties rather than less. STV (not technically PR) and open lists can answer that question; both are systems rarely used across the world.
FPTP promotes parties with a minority of the votes getting majorities to govern - this gives outweighted power to the governing party and demands that parties hold together even if they (ideologically) should split or die. Governing since the Brexit referendum has mostly about the survival of the Tory party as an entity, or the PMs position within the party - not about leading the country. PR might give more representation to fringe parties, but they would have less power overall - because they would have to work in coalition with other parties to govern. I think the same issue is true for the Labour party, tbh - they need to split and FPTP and ABC voting is the only thing keeping them as a single party.
And that assertion is consistent with PR in Israel, the French Fourth Republic or Italy, I suppose?
The power of fringe parties depends on their leverage in terms of the maths, and their willingness to use that leverage to make or break governments. I think it's a stretch to suggest that introducing 15-20% of nutcase MPs into the Commons would reduce their power - particularly in the current context with a vocal and active Tory right and the recent experience of a Labour party taken over by its hard left.
And the determination of the centre to resist that (see the recent Polish election). Would Israel be any better with FPTP ?
As the Tories tear themselves apart over Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda plan, Keir Starmer says politics has become about “empty gestures of grandstanding” and “the moralising self-indulgence of those who think politics is a sermon about themselves”
Wow, SKS woke up this morning and decided to call himself out. Very strange.
@MrHarryCole No10 say: “we will continue to listen to and engage with colleagues across the party as it passes through parliament. This bill will work and will do what we need it to do."
But rebels are demanding No10 make clear in public -TODAY - that they will fundamentally alter the Bill
@Steven_Swinford Inside Rishi Sunak's No 10 breakfast with Tory right-wingers:
* Danny Kruger opened - he told the PM he had 3 options. Pull the bill, commit to making amendments in unequivocal terms from despatch box or refuse to make changes & people will vote against
* Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't pull bill but said he would consider 'tightening it up'
* Sunak said he had 'inherited' high levels of legal migration & small boats issues - this irked some of those present
* Jonathan Gullis said he & colleagues had heard nothing from whips office or home sec. Said it felt like no-one cared about their view
* Marco Longhi said there had been no meaningful engagement before publication of bill
* Nick Fletcher said govt needs to be more Tory and stop being socialists. The PM said he's a Tory, highlighted tax cuts
* Some already swayed by PM's offer to consider amendments - others think it's not serious
* PM, Will Tanner, Rupert Yorke & Craig Williams in room for govt - no sign of chief whip
Silly Rishi for mentioning he inherited these problems from the headbangers' heroes like Boris, Priti and Suella. They'll be furious when they find out about Brexit.
@MrHarryCole No10 say: “we will continue to listen to and engage with colleagues across the party as it passes through parliament. This bill will work and will do what we need it to do."
But rebels are demanding No10 make clear in public -TODAY - that they will fundamentally alter the Bill
I'm beginning to become a bit sympathetic for Sunak: not to himself nor his policies, but with the minions he has to work with. There must be a part of him that just wants to do a Homelander on the crowd.
It is always a mystery why people like Sunak don't realise that there but for fortune they or their parents could be the very boat people he is trying to send to Rwanda.
I can understand some people feel very remote from people coming here for a better life or escaping from an unbearable one but for those just two or three generations from immigrants I find it baffling.
I suspect he's doing it to appease the Tory right and doesn't personally think its such a great policy.
@MrHarryCole No10 say: “we will continue to listen to and engage with colleagues across the party as it passes through parliament. This bill will work and will do what we need it to do."
But rebels are demanding No10 make clear in public -TODAY - that they will fundamentally alter the Bill
I'm beginning to become a bit sympathetic for Sunak: not to himself nor his policies, but with the minions he has to work with. There must be a part of him that just wants to do a Homelander on the crowd.
I’m not - because this wasn’t a hill worth dying on because the Supreme Court created a problem that could only be fixed in a manifesto commitment.
@Steven_Swinford Inside Rishi Sunak's No 10 breakfast with Tory right-wingers:
* Danny Kruger opened - he told the PM he had 3 options. Pull the bill, commit to making amendments in unequivocal terms from despatch box or refuse to make changes & people will vote against
* Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't pull bill but said he would consider 'tightening it up'
* Sunak said he had 'inherited' high levels of legal migration & small boats issues - this irked some of those present
* Jonathan Gullis said he & colleagues had heard nothing from whips office or home sec. Said it felt like no-one cared about their view
* Marco Longhi said there had been no meaningful engagement before publication of bill
* Nick Fletcher said govt needs to be more Tory and stop being socialists. The PM said he's a Tory, highlighted tax cuts
* Some already swayed by PM's offer to consider amendments - others think it's not serious
* PM, Will Tanner, Rupert Yorke & Craig Williams in room for govt - no sign of chief whip
Seriously: who the f**k took these notes? Were they minuted? This was presumably a private meeting for partisan purposes, so who leaked at that level of detail?
@Steven_Swinford Inside Rishi Sunak's No 10 breakfast with Tory right-wingers:
* Danny Kruger opened - he told the PM he had 3 options. Pull the bill, commit to making amendments in unequivocal terms from despatch box or refuse to make changes & people will vote against
* Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't pull bill but said he would consider 'tightening it up'
* Sunak said he had 'inherited' high levels of legal migration & small boats issues - this irked some of those present
* Jonathan Gullis said he & colleagues had heard nothing from whips office or home sec. Said it felt like no-one cared about their view
* Marco Longhi said there had been no meaningful engagement before publication of bill
* Nick Fletcher said govt needs to be more Tory and stop being socialists. The PM said he's a Tory, highlighted tax cuts
* Some already swayed by PM's offer to consider amendments - others think it's not serious
* PM, Will Tanner, Rupert Yorke & Craig Williams in room for govt - no sign of chief whip
Seriously: who the f**k took these notes? Were they minuted? This was presumably a private meeting for partisan purposes, so who leaked at that level of detail?
And we wonder why the standard of politicians has gone down. Who would want be a politician when whatever you say is immediately leaked to Scott
It is always a mystery why people like Sunak don't realise that there but for fortune they or their parents could be the very boat people he is trying to send to Rwanda.
I can understand some people feel very remote from people coming here for a better life or escaping from an unbearable one but for those just two or three generations from immigrants I find it baffling.
I suspect he's doing it to appease the Tory right and doesn't personally think its such a great policy.
On the contrary. If there is one rule in British politics, it's that the wealthy think the rules don't apply to them. He is rich. The others are poor. He thinks they are different to him and do not count. Recall the One Rule: Wilhoit's Law
@Steven_Swinford Inside Rishi Sunak's No 10 breakfast with Tory right-wingers:
* Danny Kruger opened - he told the PM he had 3 options. Pull the bill, commit to making amendments in unequivocal terms from despatch box or refuse to make changes & people will vote against
* Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't pull bill but said he would consider 'tightening it up'
* Sunak said he had 'inherited' high levels of legal migration & small boats issues - this irked some of those present
* Jonathan Gullis said he & colleagues had heard nothing from whips office or home sec. Said it felt like no-one cared about their view
* Marco Longhi said there had been no meaningful engagement before publication of bill
* Nick Fletcher said govt needs to be more Tory and stop being socialists. The PM said he's a Tory, highlighted tax cuts
* Some already swayed by PM's offer to consider amendments - others think it's not serious
* PM, Will Tanner, Rupert Yorke & Craig Williams in room for govt - no sign of chief whip
Seriously: who the f**k took these notes? Were they minuted? This was presumably a private meeting for partisan purposes, so who leaked at that level of detail?
And we wonder why the standard of politicians has gone down. Who would want be a politician when whatever you say is immediately leaked to Scott
Isn't it going to be some right wing Tory MP trying to stir the midden even more and destabilise HMG?
@Steven_Swinford Inside Rishi Sunak's No 10 breakfast with Tory right-wingers:
* Danny Kruger opened - he told the PM he had 3 options. Pull the bill, commit to making amendments in unequivocal terms from despatch box or refuse to make changes & people will vote against
* Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't pull bill but said he would consider 'tightening it up'
* Sunak said he had 'inherited' high levels of legal migration & small boats issues - this irked some of those present
* Jonathan Gullis said he & colleagues had heard nothing from whips office or home sec. Said it felt like no-one cared about their view
* Marco Longhi said there had been no meaningful engagement before publication of bill
* Nick Fletcher said govt needs to be more Tory and stop being socialists. The PM said he's a Tory, highlighted tax cuts
* Some already swayed by PM's offer to consider amendments - others think it's not serious
* PM, Will Tanner, Rupert Yorke & Craig Williams in room for govt - no sign of chief whip
Seriously: who the f**k took these notes? Were they minuted? This was presumably a private meeting for partisan purposes, so who leaked at that level of detail?
And we wonder why the standard of politicians has gone down. Who would want be a politician when whatever you say is immediately leaked to Scott
Isn't it going to be some right wing Tory MP trying to stir the midden even more and destabilise HMG?
@Steven_Swinford Inside Rishi Sunak's No 10 breakfast with Tory right-wingers:
* Danny Kruger opened - he told the PM he had 3 options. Pull the bill, commit to making amendments in unequivocal terms from despatch box or refuse to make changes & people will vote against
* Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't pull bill but said he would consider 'tightening it up'
* Sunak said he had 'inherited' high levels of legal migration & small boats issues - this irked some of those present
* Jonathan Gullis said he & colleagues had heard nothing from whips office or home sec. Said it felt like no-one cared about their view
* Marco Longhi said there had been no meaningful engagement before publication of bill
* Nick Fletcher said govt needs to be more Tory and stop being socialists. The PM said he's a Tory, highlighted tax cuts
* Some already swayed by PM's offer to consider amendments - others think it's not serious
* PM, Will Tanner, Rupert Yorke & Craig Williams in room for govt - no sign of chief whip
Seriously: who the f**k took these notes? Were they minuted? This was presumably a private meeting for partisan purposes, so who leaked at that level of detail?
And we wonder why the standard of politicians has gone down. Who would want be a politician when whatever you say is immediately leaked to Scott
Isn't it going to be some right wing Tory MP trying to stir the midden even more and destabilise HMG?
Probably a civil servant in the pay of the media
You seriously think so? That was a private party meeting.
@Steven_Swinford Inside Rishi Sunak's No 10 breakfast with Tory right-wingers:
* Danny Kruger opened - he told the PM he had 3 options. Pull the bill, commit to making amendments in unequivocal terms from despatch box or refuse to make changes & people will vote against
* Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't pull bill but said he would consider 'tightening it up'
* Sunak said he had 'inherited' high levels of legal migration & small boats issues - this irked some of those present
* Jonathan Gullis said he & colleagues had heard nothing from whips office or home sec. Said it felt like no-one cared about their view
* Marco Longhi said there had been no meaningful engagement before publication of bill
* Nick Fletcher said govt needs to be more Tory and stop being socialists. The PM said he's a Tory, highlighted tax cuts
* Some already swayed by PM's offer to consider amendments - others think it's not serious
* PM, Will Tanner, Rupert Yorke & Craig Williams in room for govt - no sign of chief whip
Seriously: who the f**k took these notes? Were they minuted? This was presumably a private meeting for partisan purposes, so who leaked at that level of detail?
And we wonder why the standard of politicians has gone down. Who would want be a politician when whatever you say is immediately leaked to Scott
Isn't it going to be some right wing Tory MP trying to stir the midden even more and destabilise HMG?
Probably a civil servant in the pay of the media
You seriously think so? That was a private party meeting.
Everything the PM does is documented (See Covid inquiry)
It is always a mystery why people like Sunak don't realise that there but for fortune they or their parents could be the very boat people he is trying to send to Rwanda.
I can understand some people feel very remote from people coming here for a better life or escaping from an unbearable one but for those just two or three generations from immigrants I find it baffling.
I suspect he's doing it to appease the Tory right and doesn't personally think its such a great policy.
On the contrary. If there is one rule in British politics, it's that the wealthy think the rules don't apply to them. He is rich. The others are poor. He thinks they are different to him and do not count. Recall the One Rule: Wilhoit's Law
Lots of politicians are rich by most people's standards, even if not by the Prime Minister's.
Another leading Tory rebel says they expect “decent numbers” of Tory MP to vote AGAINST second reading of the Rwanda Bill tonight
And so yet again it all becomes about intra-Tory rebellions and factional infighting, rather than governing the country.
Flying people home from Dubai so that nobody is present for the closing rounds of COP says everything you need to know about their priorities.
The trouble is the Westminster journalists love this stuff. They've got used to this being THE main political story over the last 7 years. So we get blanket coverage of every internal meeting or critical briefing, because the journalists themselves find it interesting.
The role of luck is immensely underrated. Being in the right place at the right time and then meeting the right people when you are decide so many lives. Mine, for sure.
To have been born in North London in the 1960s to two aspirational working class parents was to have been born as a window had just been opened and before it was shut again. I am not sure there will ever be a luckier generation than mine.
I reckon I was luckier than that. 12 years ago, in a chance conversation with a mate who'd just got a new job, I said, entirely in jest, "you'd better get me a job there, sounds like my sort of place". He decided to have a word with his boss, and I got a call a week or so later asking if I'd come down for an interview.
It seems I was correct about it being my sort of place - I did a management buyout in 2021, and it's now my business. It's not a massive enterprise; I currently employ 4 people, but it means I actually get to do something I enjoy, and get paid for it.
The role of luck drives the politics of decent people wherever they are on the spectrum. About 25 babies will be born today in Gaza. Organising a world/state on the imagined basis that you do not know which baby you will be (which before you were born you didn't) drives towards adopting a minimum and decent standard for everyone. This is the great thought of genius John Rawls, political philosopher. Marks out of 10 so far? Could do better.
My criticism of Rawls is that even behind his Veil of Ignorance we know we are going to be born as a human. If this was also an unknown, then standards of animal welfare would be a much greater concern.
I may have discussed this in one of my essays in my PPE degree!
Hot favourite Earps England or Man U didn't win any trophies so far as I can see - though she did get WC Golden Glove, 2nd fav? Broad had a good year but England didn't win back the Ashes.
Dettori has won races - of course with decent horses and he had a better year in 2019. He's +ve to level stakes too - but it's arguable whether he's been the best jockey this season let alone the best sportsman, more of a lifetime achievement perhaps.
Rory hasn't won any majors, which I think disqualifies golfers (and tennis players) from picking up the award.
KJT defended her title at the World Champs in her chosen sport of Heptathlon, so that's all she can do really;
Alfie Hewitt had a monstrous year winning wheelchair doubles and singles majors - but like Katarina Johnson Thompson he might suffer votes wise compared to more high profile sports particularly football/Earps. Adam Peaty also had this issue when he was in the mix a few years back.
The merit / votes order might be a broad reversal though if the betting markets are to go by.
Might be a tough disappointed not to have made the final selection:
Josh Kerr (1500 running) Tom Pidcock (Cycling) Matt Richards (Swimming) Jake Jarman (Gymnastics)
@Steven_Swinford Inside Rishi Sunak's No 10 breakfast with Tory right-wingers:
* Danny Kruger opened - he told the PM he had 3 options. Pull the bill, commit to making amendments in unequivocal terms from despatch box or refuse to make changes & people will vote against
* Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't pull bill but said he would consider 'tightening it up'
* Sunak said he had 'inherited' high levels of legal migration & small boats issues - this irked some of those present
* Jonathan Gullis said he & colleagues had heard nothing from whips office or home sec. Said it felt like no-one cared about their view
* Marco Longhi said there had been no meaningful engagement before publication of bill
* Nick Fletcher said govt needs to be more Tory and stop being socialists. The PM said he's a Tory, highlighted tax cuts
* Some already swayed by PM's offer to consider amendments - others think it's not serious
* PM, Will Tanner, Rupert Yorke & Craig Williams in room for govt - no sign of chief whip
Seriously: who the f**k took these notes? Were they minuted? This was presumably a private meeting for partisan purposes, so who leaked at that level of detail?
And we wonder why the standard of politicians has gone down. Who would want be a politician when whatever you say is immediately leaked to Scott
Isn't it going to be some right wing Tory MP trying to stir the midden even more and destabilise HMG?
Probably a civil servant in the pay of the media
You seriously think so? That was a private party meeting.
Everything the PM does is documented (See Covid inquiry)
In government, sure. But a private political discussion within the C&UP??
A senior Conservative MP tells me: “If we lose tonight there will be an election in February. Is that what they want?” Tory MPs now expect Labour to put forward a motion of no confidence in the Government tomorrow in the event of a defeat tonight .
@IpsosUK survey for @EveningStandard finds 79 per cent of Britons, including three-quarters of Tory supporters, believe the Government is doing a bad job on managing immigration, the highest since question was first asked by the pollster two years ago.
The role of luck is immensely underrated. Being in the right place at the right time and then meeting the right people when you are decide so many lives. Mine, for sure.
To have been born in North London in the 1960s to two aspirational working class parents was to have been born as a window had just been opened and before it was shut again. I am not sure there will ever be a luckier generation than mine.
I reckon I was luckier than that. 12 years ago, in a chance conversation with a mate who'd just got a new job, I said, entirely in jest, "you'd better get me a job there, sounds like my sort of place". He decided to have a word with his boss, and I got a call a week or so later asking if I'd come down for an interview.
It seems I was correct about it being my sort of place - I did a management buyout in 2021, and it's now my business. It's not a massive enterprise; I currently employ 4 people, but it means I actually get to do something I enjoy, and get paid for it.
The role of luck drives the politics of decent people wherever they are on the spectrum. About 25 babies will be born today in Gaza. Organising a world/state on the imagined basis that you do not know which baby you will be (which before you were born you didn't) drives towards adopting a minimum and decent standard for everyone. This is the great thought of genius John Rawls, political philosopher. Marks out of 10 so far? Could do better.
My criticism of Rawls is that even behind his Veil of Ignorance we know we are going to be born as a human. If this was also an unknown, then standards of animal welfare would be a much greater concern.
I may have discussed this in one of my essays in my PPE degree!
*thinks, not entireluy unrelated to recent PMs: doesn't the same argument apply to lettuces and other salad vegetables? But Aristotle did define politics as an animal characteristic, while also being more specific re the animal involved*
Told by a source in New Con grouping there are more than 29 MPs (the magic number that can sink the bill) who still not happy & their numbers are holding up….
A senior Conservative MP tells me: “If we lose tonight there will be an election in February. Is that what they want?” Tory MPs now expect Labour to put forward a motion of no confidence in the Government tomorrow in the event of a defeat tonight .
Always amusing when that happens, as the Gov't always gets a stonking win and the rebels talk up how much they enjoy having a Tory Gov't.
The cross party committee have already decided the Bill breaches the UKs international obligations. The One Nation Tories are still finding ways to vote for the Bill .
Russian submarine 'chased' from Cork Harbour by British navy Military insiders say the Russians are probing British defence systems as they realise the UK is vulnerable on its western flank because the Irish navy has no sonar capabilities https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-41288176.html
When Sunak was CofE, Sir Keir told him he should resign if he got a FPN over being at the event that Boris was fined for. He didn’t resign over that, although he did eventually resign over something else.
Why hasn’t he been asking for him to resign as PM over it now? Or why did he not oppose his installation as PM on the back of it? If it’s that bad to get an FPN that a chancellor should resign in disgrace, surely they’re not fit & proper to be PM later that year?
Hot favourite Earps England or Man U didn't win any trophies so far as I can see - though she did get WC Golden Glove, 2nd fav? Broad had a good year but England didn't win back the Ashes.
Dettori has won races - of course with decent horses and he had a better year in 2019. He's +ve to level stakes too - but it's arguable whether he's been the best jockey this season let alone the best sportsman, more of a lifetime achievement perhaps.
Rory hasn't won any majors, which I think disqualifies golfers (and tennis players) from picking up the award.
KJT defended her title at the World Champs in her chosen sport of Heptathlon, so that's all she can do really;
Alfie Hewitt had a monstrous year winning wheelchair doubles and singles majors - but like Katarina Johnson Thompson he might suffer votes wise compared to more high profile sports particularly football/Earps. Adam Peaty also had this issue when he was in the mix a few years back.
The merit / votes order might be a broad reversal though if the betting markets are to go by.
Might be a tough disappointed not to have made the final selection:
Josh Kerr (1500 running) Tom Pidcock (Cycling) Matt Richards (Swimming) Jake Jarman (Gymnastics)
I’m shocked that Owen Farrell didn’t make the list by leading massive underdogs England to within one point of the Rugby World Cup final. He’s a barrel of joy so not only sporting achievement but puts the “personality” into Spirts Personality of the Year.
On a more serious note it’s a bit of a poor list. Earps will probably have the backing and I’m guessing the Beeb are hoping for Aitana Bonmati to win the world award for a nice double of female footballers. Ronnie O’Sullivan, who actually won something, maybe should have been on the main shortlist.
When Sunak was CofE, Sir Keir told him he should resign if he got a FPN over being at the event that Boris was fined for. He didn’t resign over that, although he did eventually resign over something else.
Why hasn’t he been asking for him to resign as PM over it now? Or why did he not oppose his installation as PM on the back of it? If it’s that bad to get an FPN that a chancellor should resign in disgrace, surely they’re not fit & proper to be PM later that year?
As a point of ‘principle’
Because SKS is not a man of principle, nobody cares about the story any more, and Sunak is a weak PM that SKS actually occasionally looks charismatic when compared to.
When Sunak was CofE, Sir Keir told him he should resign if he got a FPN over being at the event that Boris was fined for. He didn’t resign over that, although he did eventually resign over something else.
Why hasn’t he been asking for him to resign as PM over it? Or why did he not oppose his installation as PM? If it’s so bad to get an FPN that a chancellor should resign in disgrace, surely they’re not fit & proper to be PM later that year?
As a point of ‘principle’
You're right; Starmer should resign on a point of principle having not held Sunak to the point of principle that he held Johnson to after Johnson broke a point of principle by having a party while the rest of the country was locked down.
When Sunak was CofE, Sir Keir told him he should resign if he got a FPN over being at the event that Boris was fined for. He didn’t resign over that, although he did eventually resign over something else.
Why hasn’t he been asking for him to resign as PM over it now? Or why did he not oppose his installation as PM on the back of it? If it’s that bad to get an FPN that a chancellor should resign in disgrace, surely they’re not fit & proper to be PM later that year?
As a point of ‘principle’
Perhaps because if Starmer did so it would look like a weird and niche obsession particularly when Sunak gifts new gaffes to Starmer almost on a weekly basis.
It is always a mystery why people like Sunak don't realise that there but for fortune they or their parents could be the very boat people he is trying to send to Rwanda.
I can understand some people feel very remote from people coming here for a better life or escaping from an unbearable one but for those just two or three generations from immigrants I find it baffling.
I suspect he's doing it to appease the Tory right and doesn't personally think its such a great policy.
On the contrary. If there is one rule in British politics, it's that the wealthy think the rules don't apply to them. He is rich. The others are poor. He thinks they are different to him and do not count. Recall the One Rule: Wilhoit's Law
There's also the Golden Rule: he who has the gold, makes the rules...
The role of luck is immensely underrated. Being in the right place at the right time and then meeting the right people when you are decide so many lives. Mine, for sure.
To have been born in North London in the 1960s to two aspirational working class parents was to have been born as a window had just been opened and before it was shut again. I am not sure there will ever be a luckier generation than mine.
I reckon I was luckier than that. 12 years ago, in a chance conversation with a mate who'd just got a new job, I said, entirely in jest, "you'd better get me a job there, sounds like my sort of place". He decided to have a word with his boss, and I got a call a week or so later asking if I'd come down for an interview.
It seems I was correct about it being my sort of place - I did a management buyout in 2021, and it's now my business. It's not a massive enterprise; I currently employ 4 people, but it means I actually get to do something I enjoy, and get paid for it.
The role of luck drives the politics of decent people wherever they are on the spectrum. About 25 babies will be born today in Gaza. Organising a world/state on the imagined basis that you do not know which baby you will be (which before you were born you didn't) drives towards adopting a minimum and decent standard for everyone. This is the great thought of genius John Rawls, political philosopher. Marks out of 10 so far? Could do better.
My criticism of Rawls is that even behind his Veil of Ignorance we know we are going to be born as a human. If this was also an unknown, then standards of animal welfare would be a much greater concern.
I may have discussed this in one of my essays in my PPE degree!
A perfectly decent point, but there are difficulties going beyond the human.
Not least is the overwhelming majority of life forms - animals in the wild, insects and many other - do not lie within our power to change, understand or directly affect, so it is mostly outside our direct influence.
Animals, including us, eat other animals; this is a naturally occurring though odd fact. Yes we should be mindful of our part in this. But we are not, and should not, affect the relationship between tiger and prey except the human sort of prey.
When Sunak was CofE, Sir Keir told him he should resign if he got a FPN over being at the event that Boris was fined for. He didn’t resign over that, although he did eventually resign over something else.
Why hasn’t he been asking for him to resign as PM over it now? Or why did he not oppose his installation as PM on the back of it? If it’s that bad to get an FPN that a chancellor should resign in disgrace, surely they’re not fit & proper to be PM later that year?
As a point of ‘principle’
Perhaps because if Starmer did so it would look like a weird and niche obsession particularly when Sunak gifts new gaffes to Starmer almost on a weekly basis.
The FPN was known and, you would hope, accounted for before Sunak became PM.
Thus, you would be calling for a species of double jeopardy.
Now, if there are still unknown aspects of that, that might be different.
When Sunak was CofE, Sir Keir told him he should resign if he got a FPN over being at the event that Boris was fined for. He didn’t resign over that, although he did eventually resign over something else.
Why hasn’t he been asking for him to resign as PM over it now? Or why did he not oppose his installation as PM on the back of it? If it’s that bad to get an FPN that a chancellor should resign in disgrace, surely they’re not fit & proper to be PM later that year?
As a point of ‘principle’
Perhaps because if Starmer did so it would look like a weird and niche obsession particularly when Sunak gifts new gaffes to Starmer almost on a weekly basis.
The FPN was known and, you would hope, accounted for before Sunak became PM.
Thus, you would be calling for a species of double jeopardy.
Now, if there are still unknown aspects of that, that might be different.
Yes, Starmer has rightly moved on; Isam clearly has not.
The cross party committee have already decided the Bill breaches the UKs international obligations. The One Nation Tories are still finding ways to vote for the Bill .
Sunak has probably told the left-wingers to vote for the bill and he will de-whip the right-wingers who don't. And has probably told the right-wingers to vote for the bill and he will de-whip the left-wingers who don't.
Is there any aspect of the last 13 years of Conservative government that hasn't been an abysmal failure - even if held to their own standards? The idea that austerity meant we would have a stronger economy if bad things came our way - proven untrue with Brexit and Covid. The changes to the NHS have demonstrably worsened the service, not made it better. Infrastructure has been left to fall apart, and now (as everyone said at the time it would be) it has been concluded that their changes to education over the last decade have done more harm than good:
Can anyone point to a single success of the prevailing Conservative political hegemony since the coalition that hasn't turned into ash in their hands? Even many Brexiteers are unhappy with the outcomes of us leaving the EU; either because it isn't "real Brexit" or because there is a distinct lack of sunlit uplands!
Russian submarine 'chased' from Cork Harbour by British navy Military insiders say the Russians are probing British defence systems as they realise the UK is vulnerable on its western flank because the Irish navy has no sonar capabilities https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-41288176.html
Just after the Pisa Report indicates that Education in England is performing better than the other parts of the UK. And suggests we should move more towards what I understand to be the Scottish model.
Russian submarine 'chased' from Cork Harbour by British navy Military insiders say the Russians are probing British defence systems as they realise the UK is vulnerable on its western flank because the Irish navy has no sonar capabilities https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-41288176.html
The cold war continues.
That's quite the piece, pointing out all the things that Ireland could do in the 1960s or 1980s when they were a far poorer country, that they just do not have capability for now.
eg a working ship with sonar, an airforce with some jets etc.
Russian submarine 'chased' from Cork Harbour by British navy Military insiders say the Russians are probing British defence systems as they realise the UK is vulnerable on its western flank because the Irish navy has no sonar capabilities https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-41288176.html
The cold war continues.
That's quite the piece, pointing out all the things that Ireland could do in the 1960s or 1980s when they were a far poorer country, that they just do not have capability for now.
eg a working ship with sonar, an airforce with some jets etc.
I forgot that Sunak essentially got the CoE job because he had greater ambitions than he had principles/backbone (or at least fewer principals than Javid). Says quite a lot. Happy to be bullied as long as he gets to sit at the big table. Perhaps that is what the various Brexit-throwback perceive and are exploiting now.
I still fail to understand how this Rwanda nonsense continues on. I know it is not a policy for my politics - but even if you accept it on its own terms it seems a very expensive “deterrence” policy, and the likely effect of that deterrence is going to be small. Surely it can’t just be about getting headlines?
I know you can argue that “Nauru” worked for Australia. But, last time I looked our geography is a touch different to Oz - and it is not like Nauru is an unqualified success.
I do appreciate that the rich world is going to have to work out a better way of handling irregular migration. Traditionally, it was neighbours that bore the brunt of migration due to war etc. But, that feels to have changed. Building walls and flying small amounts of migrants to the back of beyond is not going to work - and just reminds me of John Lanchester’s dystopian eco-disaster novel “the wall.” Better answers are needed. Sunak and his mob don’t appear to have the faintest idea what they may be.
Just after the Pisa Report indicates that Education in England is performing better than the other parts of the UK. And suggests we should move more towards what I understand to be the Scottish model.
Hmmm.
By coincidence I came across a suggestion that the Pisa Report for England was based on a non-standard sample. I have no idea if this is true so judge for youjrself.
Russian submarine 'chased' from Cork Harbour by British navy Military insiders say the Russians are probing British defence systems as they realise the UK is vulnerable on its western flank because the Irish navy has no sonar capabilities https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-41288176.html
The cold war continues.
That's quite the piece, pointing out all the things that Ireland could do in the 1960s or 1980s when they were a far poorer country, that they just do not have capability for now.
eg a working ship with sonar, an airforce with some jets etc.
Ireland's defence spending is criminally low:
Irish population: 5 million / Irish gdp: $500 Billion / GDP per cap: $100k Irish defence budget: €1.23 billion ($1.32 Bn) Rounded 0.3% of gdp.
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
It's not just Europe now. They're a party-within-a-party and rejoicing in their pseudo-structures as such. Star Chambers and so on.
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
I would argue the issue is, in many ways, FPTP - if you have "safe seats" on 30-40% of the vote because there is no unified opposition, you end up with people who are frothing at the brain without anywhere near majority support, even in their own constituency. Put that together with 24 hour news cycles, and you have nutters who are incentivised to say the most ridiculous stuff because it gets them on TV and in headlines and therefore loved by those who care too much about politics and spend all their time online caring about politics (namely - us) when most people couldn't tell you who is in the cabinet.
Much as I favour PR, FPTP does keep most nutcases of left and right out of parliament. BxP was polling a steady low-double-digit share under Johnson, before the election. The dynamics of FPTP (including the Brexit Party opting out of standing in many seats), ended up squeezing that down to 2% on polling day but under PR, those dynamics wouldn't have been anything like as intense and it's entirely plausible that the previous share would have maintained, as in 2015 - resulting in 60-80 Brexit Party MPs.
In reality, the issue is less the electoral system but the system of selection, which plays to the prejudices of party members and only then to the public (not least because an individual candidate's views matter very little in terms of influencing the public's vote, especially when not already an MP with a record).
And PR tends to put more power into the hands of parties rather than less. STV (not technically PR) and open lists can answer that question; both are systems rarely used across the world.
FPTP promotes parties with a minority of the votes getting majorities to govern - this gives outweighted power to the governing party and demands that parties hold together even if they (ideologically) should split or die. Governing since the Brexit referendum has mostly about the survival of the Tory party as an entity, or the PMs position within the party - not about leading the country. PR might give more representation to fringe parties, but they would have less power overall - because they would have to work in coalition with other parties to govern. I think the same issue is true for the Labour party, tbh - they need to split and FPTP and ABC voting is the only thing keeping them as a single party.
And that assertion is consistent with PR in Israel, the French Fourth Republic or Italy, I suppose?
The power of fringe parties depends on their leverage in terms of the maths, and their willingness to use that leverage to make or break governments. I think it's a stretch to suggest that introducing 15-20% of nutcase MPs into the Commons would reduce their power - particularly in the current context with a vocal and active Tory right and the recent experience of a Labour party taken over by its hard left.
And the determination of the centre to resist that (see the recent Polish election). Would Israel be any better with FPTP ?
Israel would be just as much a mess politically under FPTP. PR didn’t create the fractured Israeli political system. That comes from a country split between liberal Tel Aviv-ers, settlers, very religious Jewish groups, “Arab Israelis”, etc.
To extrapolate on what David H said, we have one dimension of proportionality, but we have this orthogonal dimension of ordinality. More ordinal systems, like STV, AV and open lists, encourage politicians to try to reach beyond a narrow constituency. You may see that as a good thing.
There are plenty of examples of extremists being in power under FPTP, as with today’s GOP in control of the House, or Modi in India.
Success usually requires both talent and luck. But the more luck you have, the less talent you need. It strikes me that Sunak's problem is that it's all happened too easily and too fast. Maybe in a sense he has been too lucky for his own good. He's totally lying about his WhatsApp messages, anyway, the slippery toad.
No, Sunak's problem is the same as May's, and Cameron's, and John Major's. There is a group of Conservative MPs obsessed by Europe to the exclusion of anything else, even the continuance of their own government. And for the most part they are wrong about Europe.
Utter rubbish. Utilising the post-Brexit settlement to the best national advantage is the clear and settled view of the vast bulk of the party. That a career in the PCP holds some bizarre attraction to conviction Lib Dems, and CCHQ continues to stuff the candidates lists with them is the great mystery of our age. Instead of continually fighting to 'modernise' the party so it's exactly the same as the other parties, why not fuck off and join one.
Just after the Pisa Report indicates that Education in England is performing better than the other parts of the UK. And suggests we should move more towards what I understand to be the Scottish model.
Hmmm.
By coincidence I came across a suggestion that the Pisa Report for England was based on a non-standard sample. I have no idea if this is true so judge for youjrself.
For England, this meant that “higher performing pupils may be overrepresented” and some results “may therefore be somewhat higher than they might otherwise be”.
England was not alone: other countries including the United States and China fell below the standards. But the OECD makes no adjustments to the scores when such standards are not met.
PISA estimates that this means England’s maths and reading scores could be 7 or 8 points higher than they should be.
This makes quite a difference. For instance, it would knock England into the group currently classed as countries that “scored significantly lower than England” in maths and reading! (although this is obviously not including potential points downgrades for other countries similarly affected).
Russian submarine 'chased' from Cork Harbour by British navy Military insiders say the Russians are probing British defence systems as they realise the UK is vulnerable on its western flank because the Irish navy has no sonar capabilities https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-41288176.html
The cold war continues.
That's quite the piece, pointing out all the things that Ireland could do in the 1960s or 1980s when they were a far poorer country, that they just do not have capability for now.
eg a working ship with sonar, an airforce with some jets etc.
Ireland's defence spending is criminally low:
Irish population: 5 million / Irish gdp: $500 Billion / GDP per cap: $100k Irish defence budget: €1.23 billion ($1.32 Bn) Rounded 0.3% of gdp.
They're not in NATO mind either...
They don’t need to be in NATO, they are in the sweet spot where their neighbour needs to cover them in order to protect themselves from the back door and nobody is going to attack them as either the US would intervene or the EU. I guess the only pressure to raise their defence spending would come from the EU.
Russian submarine 'chased' from Cork Harbour by British navy Military insiders say the Russians are probing British defence systems as they realise the UK is vulnerable on its western flank because the Irish navy has no sonar capabilities https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-41288176.html
The cold war continues.
That's quite the piece, pointing out all the things that Ireland could do in the 1960s or 1980s when they were a far poorer country, that they just do not have capability for now.
eg a working ship with sonar, an airforce with some jets etc.
When Sunak was CofE, Sir Keir told him he should resign if he got a FPN over being at the event that Boris was fined for. He didn’t resign over that, although he did eventually resign over something else.
Why hasn’t he been asking for him to resign as PM over it now? Or why did he not oppose his installation as PM on the back of it? If it’s that bad to get an FPN that a chancellor should resign in disgrace, surely they’re not fit & proper to be PM later that year?
As a point of ‘principle’
Because SKS is not a man of principle, nobody cares about the story any more, and Sunak is a weak PM that SKS actually occasionally looks charismatic when compared to.
To be fair he may still mention it, I’ve not watched any politics that I can think of in the last year or so, and switch the tv over when Sir Keir appears on it. You’d think he would at some point say “How can a man with an FPN even be PM?” as he was so bothered about Boris having one
Just after the Pisa Report indicates that Education in England is performing better than the other parts of the UK. And suggests we should move more towards what I understand to be the Scottish model.
Hmmm.
We need to be a bit careful about fetishising Pisa because their rankings do not coincide with best economic performance.
The Lords have half a point. Maybe we should reconsider what is taught in schools. If we are to move to more "relevant" lessons, then something has to give. Whether children should be taught calculus or spreadsheets, geography or cookery is properly a matter for politicians. Where the Lords have no expertise is in *how* subjects should be taught. Whether rote learning is good or bad should be left to the experts.
Comments
But the structural problem is the same. Well, almost: May had equal rebellions from the Tory left, Major had pressure from the likes of Clarke and Heseltine, Sunak has much less from that wing, not least because Johnson purged them. But either way, the net result is that the government has no firm majority.
The Tory Right has learned from the US Republicans that as long as the moderates stay loyal and pliant, the Right can leverage their votes to continually force policy and personnel to their wing.
One Nation Tories also set to meet the PM later...
(But why)
I can understand some people feel very remote from people coming here for a better life or escaping from an unbearable one but for those just two or three generations from immigrants I find it baffling.
Currently in the morning “government looks like it will loose” phase. To be followed by afternoon “intense negotiations, whips working the tea rooms” phase. Then the evening “Minister offers clarifications from despatch box” phase. And the 10.00 pm “Sunak squeaks through” phase.
Not that that matters in the sense of what Tory MPs did.
The media are bigging up the drama but for once I agree with Dan Hodges .
A lot of non lawyers seem to think law is all done in discrete and reliable fragments. It isn't. Its an organic structure 800 years old and there is an awful lot of it. All new laws are relatable to the whole of pre existing law.
Starmer's point this morning that at most this deals with about 100 people while 160,000 or some such figure have not yet been processed becomes a bit of a killer once attention turns that way.
In reality, the issue is less the electoral system but the system of selection, which plays to the prejudices of party members and only then to the public (not least because an individual candidate's views matter very little in terms of influencing the public's vote, especially when not already an MP with a record).
And PR tends to put more power into the hands of parties rather than less. STV (not technically PR) and open lists can answer that question; both are systems rarely used across the world.
He decided to have a word with his boss, and I got a call a week or so later asking if I'd come down for an interview.
It seems I was correct about it being my sort of place - I did a management buyout in 2021, and it's now my business. It's not a massive enterprise; I currently employ 4 people, but it means I actually get to do something I enjoy, and get paid for it.
Tories on the right have been doing the numbers on this evening's vote and early indications suggest they don't have the numbers
Senior Tory MP: 'Some of our colleagues have deluded themselves into thinking the govt will make the necessary changes at report stage. They won't'
@kateferguson4
Lots of talks going on behind the scenes as Tory rebels weigh up going nuclear and voting the bill down today, or biding their time and trying to amend.
New Conservatives holding more meetings later today….after their breakfast summit with PM this morning
Senior Tory MP: 'Some of our colleagues have deluded themselves into thinking the govt will make the necessary changes at report stage. They won't'
https://x.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1734524110632374639?s=20
More realistically, they should know that there isn't a cat-in-hell's chance that they can amend the Bill without govt support (and, indeed, the support of Tory MPs who do care about international law). But maybe they want the battle just in order to make the point?
The power of fringe parties depends on their leverage in terms of the maths, and their willingness to use that leverage to make or break governments. I think it's a stretch to suggest that introducing 15-20% of nutcase MPs into the Commons would reduce their power - particularly in the current context with a vocal and active Tory right and the recent experience of a Labour party taken over by its hard left.
Hearing of a tragic incident on the Bibby Stockholm barge, involving the alleged death of an asylum seeker, according to someone living on the boat
Dorset Police has confirmed an incident has occurred and will be providing updates shortly
While overall the last decade and a half's energy policy has been more than a bit of a mess (see, for example, the indecision, delays, and consequent cost escalation for nuclear), without that initial impetus (which included large subsidies for the development of onshore and then offshore wind), we'd be in a far worse position.
Some smaller items - for instance the investment in promising fusion technology.
The speedy response at the beginning of the Ukraine invasion.
Anything else ?
Hearing Graham Stewart been called back from Dubai cop for the Rwanda vote leaving no Ministers for final hours of the talks there
FPTP not infrequently holds us hostage to such minority extremes on both left and right. Time for this bunch to face the consequences.
Inside Rishi Sunak's No 10 breakfast with Tory right-wingers:
* Danny Kruger opened - he told the PM he had 3 options. Pull the bill, commit to making amendments in unequivocal terms from despatch box or refuse to make changes & people will vote against
* Rishi Sunak said he wouldn't pull bill but said he would consider 'tightening it up'
* Sunak said he had 'inherited' high levels of legal migration & small boats issues - this irked some of those present
* Jonathan Gullis said he & colleagues had heard nothing from whips office or home sec. Said it felt like no-one cared about their view
* Marco Longhi said there had been no meaningful engagement before publication of bill
* Nick Fletcher said govt needs to be more Tory and stop being socialists. The PM said he's a Tory, highlighted tax cuts
* Some already swayed by PM's offer to consider amendments - others think it's not serious
* PM, Will Tanner, Rupert Yorke & Craig Williams in room for govt - no sign of chief whip
As the Tories tear themselves apart over Rishi Sunak’s Rwanda plan, Keir Starmer says politics has become about “empty gestures of grandstanding” and “the moralising self-indulgence of those who think politics is a sermon about themselves”
As someone who doesn't really like the existence of states and is certainly no fan of capitalism, I find it strange to often be the believer, if not defender, of state power to impact lives and prop up the capitalist system. Those who claim to want some unifying principle, some sense of identity and shared national understanding, refuse to allow the welfare state, well funded public education and healthcare to be that thing. When FDR brought in the New Deal he saved capitalism (from itself) and reinvigorated the United States; when we brought in the NHS we created, as many comment, the closest thing to a "secular religion" in Britain. And yet, out of practical harm reduction, I find myself arguing for state social democracy, which would inevitably involve capitalist markets (just somewhat restrained and regulated), and it is those who say they are care about nationhood and capitalism that argue for policies that sow the seeds of the destruction of both...
Would Israel be any better with FPTP ?
No10 say: “we will continue to listen to and engage with colleagues across the party as it passes through parliament. This bill will work and will do what we need it to do."
But rebels are demanding No10 make clear in public -TODAY - that they will fundamentally alter the Bill
Horrible news from Dorset...
An asylum seeker on the Bibby Stockholm has died
Multiple sources say it is a suicide.
Home Office: “We are aware of reporting of an incident... It would be inappropriate to comment further at this time”
I'm concerned that if the Tory "moderates" bend over any further they'll dislocate something.
Another leading Tory rebel says they expect “decent numbers” of Tory MP to vote AGAINST second reading of the Rwanda Bill tonight
Flying people home from Dubai so that nobody is present for the closing rounds of COP says everything you need to know about their priorities.
The trouble is the Westminster journalists love this stuff. They've got used to this being THE main political story over the last 7 years. So we get blanket coverage of every internal meeting or critical briefing, because the journalists themselves find it interesting.
I may have discussed this in one of my essays in my PPE degree!
Hot favourite Earps England or Man U didn't win any trophies so far as I can see - though she did get WC Golden Glove, 2nd fav? Broad had a good year but England didn't win back the Ashes.
Dettori has won races - of course with decent horses and he had a better year in 2019. He's +ve to level stakes too - but it's arguable whether he's been the best jockey this season let alone the best sportsman, more of a lifetime achievement perhaps.
Rory hasn't won any majors, which I think disqualifies golfers (and tennis players) from picking up the award.
KJT defended her title at the World Champs in her chosen sport of Heptathlon, so that's all she can do really;
Alfie Hewitt had a monstrous year winning wheelchair doubles and singles majors - but like Katarina Johnson Thompson he might suffer votes wise compared to more high profile sports particularly football/Earps. Adam Peaty also had this issue when he was in the mix a few years back.
The merit / votes order might be a broad reversal though if the betting markets are to go by.
Might be a tough disappointed not to have made the final selection:
Josh Kerr (1500 running)
Tom Pidcock (Cycling)
Matt Richards (Swimming)
Jake Jarman (Gymnastics)
NEW 👀
A senior Conservative MP tells me: “If we lose tonight there will be an election in February. Is that what they want?”
Tory MPs now expect Labour to put forward a motion of no confidence in the Government tomorrow in the event of a defeat tonight .
@IpsosUK survey for @EveningStandard finds 79 per cent of Britons, including three-quarters of Tory supporters, believe the Government is doing a bad job on managing immigration, the highest since question was first asked by the pollster two years ago.
Told by a source in New Con grouping there are more than 29 MPs (the magic number that can sink the bill) who still not happy & their numbers are holding up….
Military insiders say the Russians are probing British defence systems as they realise the UK is vulnerable on its western flank because the Irish navy has no sonar capabilities
https://www.irishexaminer.com/news/munster/arid-41288176.html
The cold war continues.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67692099
This is SNP levels of misfortune. The GRR debate was electrified by a couple of horrible crimes; now the Tories have this to contend with.
Mr Tickels death in the Thick of It comes to mind.
Why hasn’t he been asking for him to resign as PM over it now? Or why did he not oppose his installation as PM on the back of it? If it’s that bad to get an FPN that a chancellor should resign in disgrace, surely they’re not fit & proper to be PM later that year?
As a point of ‘principle’
On a more serious note it’s a bit of a poor list. Earps will probably have the backing and I’m guessing the Beeb are hoping for Aitana Bonmati to win the world award for a nice double of female footballers. Ronnie O’Sullivan, who actually won something, maybe should have been on the main shortlist.
Not least is the overwhelming majority of life forms - animals in the wild, insects and many other - do not lie within our power to change, understand or directly affect, so it is mostly outside our direct influence.
Animals, including us, eat other animals; this is a naturally occurring though odd fact. Yes we should be mindful of our part in this. But we are not, and should not, affect the relationship between tiger and prey except the human sort of prey.
Thus, you would be calling for a species of double jeopardy.
Now, if there are still unknown aspects of that, that might be different.
Alternatively, it's a bedtime story they're telling themselves to justify their actions later today.
And has probably told the right-wingers to vote for the bill and he will de-whip the left-wingers who don't.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslondon/asylum-seeker-dies-on-bibby-stockholm-barge-in-dorset/ar-AA1lnrNd?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=d4af15ec27f74829b7c89648b01db341&ei=16
Bilateral deal with Albania over boat crossings?
Or is that Scotch Expertise?
Edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_submarine_S-363
Hmmm.
eg a working ship with sonar, an airforce with some jets etc.
I forgot that Sunak essentially got the CoE job because he had greater ambitions than he had principles/backbone (or at least fewer principals than Javid). Says quite a lot. Happy to be bullied as long as he gets to sit at the big table. Perhaps that is what the various Brexit-throwback perceive and are exploiting now.
I still fail to understand how this Rwanda nonsense continues on. I know it is not a policy for my politics - but even if you accept it on its own terms it seems a very expensive “deterrence” policy, and the likely effect of that deterrence is going to be small. Surely it can’t just be about getting headlines?
I know you can argue that “Nauru” worked for Australia. But, last time I looked our geography is a touch different to Oz - and it is not like Nauru is an unqualified success.
I do appreciate that the rich world is going to have to work out a better way of handling irregular migration. Traditionally, it was neighbours that bore the brunt of migration due to war etc. But, that feels to have changed. Building walls and flying small amounts of migrants to the back of beyond is not going to work - and just reminds me of John Lanchester’s dystopian eco-disaster novel “the wall.” Better answers are needed. Sunak and his mob don’t appear to have the faintest idea what they may be.
https://www.thenational.scot/news/23980483.tory-minister-failed-mention-england-cheated-pisa-tests/
Irish population: 5 million / Irish gdp: $500 Billion / GDP per cap: $100k
Irish defence budget: €1.23 billion ($1.32 Bn) Rounded 0.3% of gdp.
They're not in NATO mind either...
To extrapolate on what David H said, we have one dimension of proportionality, but we have this orthogonal dimension of ordinality. More ordinal systems, like STV, AV and open lists, encourage politicians to try to reach beyond a narrow constituency. You may see that as a good thing.
There are plenty of examples of extremists being in power under FPTP, as with today’s GOP in control of the House, or Modi in India.
For England, this meant that “higher performing pupils may be overrepresented” and some results “may therefore be somewhat higher than they might otherwise be”.
England was not alone: other countries including the United States and China fell below the standards. But the OECD makes no adjustments to the scores when such standards are not met.
PISA estimates that this means England’s maths and reading scores could be 7 or 8 points higher than they should be.
This makes quite a difference. For instance, it would knock England into the group currently classed as countries that “scored significantly lower than England” in maths and reading! (although this is obviously not including potential points downgrades for other countries similarly affected).
Rishi is feeling the heat as his personal ratings have fallen to their lowest level amid the civil war over his controversial Rwanda bill #frontpage
https://x.com/EveningStandard/status/1734543929058455585?s=20
The Lords have half a point. Maybe we should reconsider what is taught in schools. If we are to move to more "relevant" lessons, then something has to give. Whether children should be taught calculus or spreadsheets, geography or cookery is properly a matter for politicians. Where the Lords have no expertise is in *how* subjects should be taught. Whether rote learning is good or bad should be left to the experts.