Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
The UK press is so biased against Labour, staying out of the papers is the best outcome a Labour leader can hope for.
But the broadcast media isnt, and he avoids that too. Amdist all the fun of saying how crap the current government is - and they are crap - no-one is putting any scrutiny on what will replace them. The only positive from this is expectations wont be high but this will not be like 1997 with people who had an agenda it will be more like shuffling chairs at the parish council.
I'm pretty sure I heard him being interviewed on the Today programme the other day.
Thats simply hiding in plain sight. I understand the logic of not interrupting your opponent when hes making a mistake, but at some point SKS has to come out of the cupboard and make a few of his own.
Over 15GW of wind power again this morning after Orsted confirmed that they are proceeding with the Horsea 3 wind farm yesterday which will be the largest single windfarm in the world and should be on line by 2027. This is despite the cancellation of a number of major developments around the world with the company recognising and acknowledging that the policy structure in the UK made it attractive.
Amongst all the populist blundering incompetence wind is something the UK has got broadly right.
It's a good illustration of a positive long term policy adopted and persisted with.
In terms of “meaningful change”, for better or worse, to coin a recent SKS phrase, Davey must be up there alongside Osborne as CoE and Gove as Ed Sec of cabinet ministers other than the PM in the last decade.
Sadly the toxic legacy of having helped the Tories get in means Lib Dems are still hesitant to talk about their record in coalition.
I think Ed Davey is underrated as a politician too. We have got a bit too used to flamboyant scoundrels to value dull competence.
I think he will come over well at the debate stage of the campaign, being a bit more charismatic than Keir.
I expect he won’t get a chance. It’ll be Sunak vs Keir, with a conference league debate of Davey, Yousaf, Tice, Price and whoever the Green leader is nowadays.
Incidentally, what's happening with the Cabinet Secretary ?
Relevant to the talk about Starmer.
The first real evidence of how effective he's likely to be in government is only going to come if and when the opposition talks with the civil service start.
Labour have conspicuously not been in a rush over this - but the future of Case (and his possible replacement) might factor into that.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
The ONS is just trying to get a bit of publicity, in a year these figures will be revised quietly and show growth.
"Scientists have identified five new species of soft-furred hedgehogs from south-east Asia.
Two of the species discovered are entirely new to science, while three have been elevated from subspecies level by researchers, who carried out DNA analysis as well as detailed physical observations of the mammals."
The only person who seems to think SKS might be a good PM is me. I think he has demonstrated a lot of skill in producing a plan and then sticking to it - and it’s been very effective in changing the Labour Party. Arguably he’s changed the Labour Party the fastest out of any leader in history.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
So the Junior Doctors should realise this and accept the pay offer?
I can't speak for the JDC but have voted to accept the Consultants pay offer.
The vibe on medical social media is for rejection, but always difficult to judge sentiment.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
I’m currently reading Jeremy Heywood’s biography (by his wife), which offers an interesting glimpse inside the reality of government. In particular the relentless 24/7 treadmill of issues and problems, meetings and more meetings, people to see, and with the politics left for the politicians to consider. The chapters on the GFC are a great read; Brown comes out of it very well for his leadership and determination as the financial crisis unfolds, which played to all of his technical and political strengths. Yet failure on a stack of other fronts and his government was soon back behind in the polls.
My guess is that Sunak is ‘performing’ OK in all the meetings behind the scenes, but lacks any real political vision or instinct and allowing others to pull his strings when it comes to the politics, very much as Hague did (and of course LOTO is mostly politics, being PM is mostly administration). And unable to join one up with the other.
Thanks Ian. That sounds like one to read.
I am pleased to hear what it says about Brown because this is a line I have been pushing on this Site for many years, and I take flak for it. He was a poor PM generally, but he got the GFC right and indeed many other leaders at the time, notably the newly elected Obama, looked to him for leadership and they got it. The crisis played to his strengths, and he had the credibility in financial circles to carry it through.
Fwiw my view of Blair is kind of a mirror image of Brown. He was a good PM, who got the huge issue of Iraq terribly wrong.
It's all debatable, of course, but nice to know I have Heywood on my side.
Brown was caught asleep at the wheel as the crisis built, but once it broke he clearly rose to the challenge, and exercised leadership on the global stage, as you say. Heywood (through his wife) recounts how Brown was most unusually invited to the Euro-countries' summit, and how Obama asked him to lead on stuff, and how the US's original TARP plan was changed in the light of the UK's different approach.
The book is a great read for anyone interested in politics - I'm now into the chapters about the formation of the 2010 coalition. You have to make some allowance for his wife writing the book during (based on his recounted recollections) and after her husband's sad death, and there isn't a great deal of criticism in it - essentially Heywood was right on everything. Discounting for that, the civil service comes out of it pretty well, especially given some of the politicians they have to cope with.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
The ONS is just trying to get a bit of publicity, in a year these figures will be revised quietly and show growth.
A strange way to get publicity with a low key announcement a day before everything stops for 2 weeks!
Apart from the revision that showed less damage from the exceptional events of pandemic and lockdown revisions have been pretty trivial (like these) and pretty much equally up and down.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
Sunak is not a technocrat, he’s a micro-manager. There’s a very big difference. He behaves like someone who has never run a big organisation. Because he never has, I guess.
What makes things worse is that he clearly has very little understanding of the UK or the people who live in it. That’s not a surprise given his trajectory - Winchester to Oxbridge to Silicon Valley to the City to Parliament, while marrying a billionaire’s daughter along the way - but what’s bizarre is his total lack of interest in finding out more. He has outsourced his research to the Mail and the Telegraph, and as you’d expect they’re not providing him with the full picture. He’d know that if he’d ever lived in the real world.
Interesting. In Hague's endorsement video of Rishi for the leadership (which I thought was actually quite good) Hague says the complete opposite - that Rishi is a man of discovery and limitless curiosity who gets up at 4.00 am to find out how cows are milked.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
I’m currently reading Jeremy Heywood’s biography (by his wife), which offers an interesting glimpse inside the reality of government. In particular the relentless 24/7 treadmill of issues and problems, meetings and more meetings, people to see, and with the politics left for the politicians to consider. The chapters on the GFC are a great read; Brown comes out of it very well for his leadership and determination as the financial crisis unfolds, which played to all of his technical and political strengths. Yet failure on a stack of other fronts and his government was soon back behind in the polls.
My guess is that Sunak is ‘performing’ OK in all the meetings behind the scenes, but lacks any real political vision or instinct and allowing others to pull his strings when it comes to the politics, very much as Hague did (and of course LOTO is mostly politics, being PM is mostly administration). And unable to join one up with the other.
You do not have to go full-on Nadine Dorries to doubt the motivation and basic competence of the backroom staff. The likelihood is that the people around Rishi are the same people who were behind Liz Truss and Boris, and look how that turned out.
I don't think that stacks up. In particular, it was obvious to anyone (who cared to look) what Boris was like, going right back to his schooldays. He was beyond redemption and the best the officials could do was try and cope. Similarly Truss. Politicans with more self-belief than self-awareness normally dig their own graves.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
UK PMIs had been very weak, so I don't think it's that surprising.
Not very weak but certainly below 50 for a few months although the services PMI has now moved back into positive territory.
Ok, I confess my ignorance. What's a PMI? Pre-Menstrual Indicator?
Purchasing Managers Index, above 50 indicating that purchasing managers are anticipating expansion.
Sunak is not a technocrat, he’s a micro-manager. There’s a very big difference. He behaves like someone who has never run a big organisation. Because he never has, I guess.
What makes things worse is that he clearly has very little understanding of the UK or the people who live in it. That’s not a surprise given his trajectory - Winchester to Oxbridge to Silicon Valley to the City to Parliament, while marrying a billionaire’s daughter along the way - but what’s bizarre is his total lack of interest in finding out more. He has outsourced his research to the Mail and the Telegraph, and as you’d expect they’re not providing him with the full picture. He’d know that if he’d ever lived in the real world.
Interesting. In Hague's endorsement video of Rishi for the leadership (which I thought was actually quite good) Hague says the complete opposite - that Rishi is a man of discovery and limitless curiosity who gets up at 4.00 am to find out how cows are milked.
I suspect that he is one of those people who likes to accumulate "facts" but is never able to synthesise them into anything coherent. That would fit with Hague's description.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
We don’t live behind our means. We choose to not invest and to underfund public services.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
We as human beings are not suddenly more avaricious by nature. Instead we have a society and culture that, I would argue, is striving against our natures to feed a beast that is increasingly out of control.
To put it in plain English - our current model of capitalism, whilst bringing us incredible benefits in the past (not all of which were honourably gained, but there we go), is increasingly pushing our economy, society and culture to destruction.
It’s insidious. Bringing up a kid, for example, it is almost impossible to avoid imprinting on their developing brains addictive behaviours that will reduce their ability to delay gratification as an adult, even though we know the ability to delay gratification is closely correlated with many of the markers of a successful and fulfilling life.
To give just one example of this - if you watch an episode of Numberblocks on iPlayer these days it will automatically show you the next episode. Numberblocks is an awesome way to teach kids early maths, but the opt-out nature of watching repeat episodes is a classic way to hook someone into addictive behaviour.
It’s a tiny example in itself, but there a thousands of such examples. Our culture is eating itself. Hyperbole, some of you will shout. But I think that is only because we are all too deeply enmeshed in our current capitalist model to see it for what it is.
Over 15GW of wind power again this morning after Orsted confirmed that they are proceeding with the Horsea 3 wind farm yesterday which will be the largest single windfarm in the world and should be on line by 2027. This is despite the cancellation of a number of major developments around the world with the company recognising and acknowledging that the policy structure in the UK made it attractive.
Amongst all the populist blundering incompetence wind is something the UK has got broadly right.
It's a good illustration of a positive long term policy adopted and persisted with.
In terms of “meaningful change”, for better or worse, to coin a recent SKS phrase, Davey must be up there alongside Osborne as CoE and Gove as Ed Sec of cabinet ministers other than the PM in the last decade.
Sadly the toxic legacy of having helped the Tories get in means Lib Dems are still hesitant to talk about their record in coalition.
I think Ed Davey is underrated as a politician too. We have got a bit too used to flamboyant scoundrels to value dull competence.
I think he will come over well at the debate stage of the campaign, being a bit more charismatic than Keir.
I expect he won’t get a chance. It’ll be Sunak vs Keir, with a conference league debate of Davey, Yousaf, Tice, Price and whoever the Green leader is nowadays.
And Foxy's point goes further for the Tories and Labour, who are always in the game.
As a minor party you do need to get noticed - and Davey's worthiness will mostly be a disadvantage, as he'll never get to the point where it might be a strength. The Liberals and LibDems have, despite their small numbers, been very lucky in having a run of leading politicians all charismatic, in their different ways (and at least to begin with) - Grimond, Thorpe, young Steel, Ashdown, Kennedy, Clegg - when they've got noticed and built their position. The forgettable ones - Campbell, Cable, Swinson, etc. - haven't done so well.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
If your employer is any good the company should cover it.
insuring new gadgets
Almost never worth it, except if you're particularly good at breaking mobiles maybe.
travel to see relatives
It'll cost us about £30 in fuel at a guess.
In my (limited) experience, large companies do not like paying for Christmas parties any more. Possibly through cheese-paring but more likely because they are worried about being seen to discriminate against other religions.
Over 15GW of wind power again this morning after Orsted confirmed that they are proceeding with the Horsea 3 wind farm yesterday which will be the largest single windfarm in the world and should be on line by 2027. This is despite the cancellation of a number of major developments around the world with the company recognising and acknowledging that the policy structure in the UK made it attractive.
Amongst all the populist blundering incompetence wind is something the UK has got broadly right.
It's a good illustration of a positive long term policy adopted and persisted with.
In terms of “meaningful change”, for better or worse, to coin a recent SKS phrase, Davey must be up there alongside Osborne as CoE and Gove as Ed Sec of cabinet ministers other than the PM in the last decade.
Sadly the toxic legacy of having helped the Tories get in means Lib Dems are still hesitant to talk about their record in coalition.
I think Ed Davey is underrated as a politician too. We have got a bit too used to flamboyant scoundrels to value dull competence.
I think he will come over well at the debate stage of the campaign, being a bit more charismatic than Keir.
I expect he won’t get a chance. It’ll be Sunak vs Keir, with a conference league debate of Davey, Yousaf, Tice, Price and whoever the Green leader is nowadays.
And Foxy's point goes further for the Tories and Labour, who are always in the game.
As a minor party you do need to get noticed - and Davey's worthiness will mostly be a disadvantage, as he'll never get to the point where it might be a strength. The Liberals and LibDems have, despite their small numbers, been very lucky in having a run of leading politicians all charismatic, in their different ways (and at least to begin with) - Grimond, Thorpe, young Steel, Ashdown, Kennedy, Clegg - when they've got noticed and built their position. The forgettable ones - Campbell, Cable, Swinson, etc. - haven't done so well.
I’m not sure I’d put Swinson in the forgettable category. She did raise her head above the parapet but flunked it, sadly.
The only person who seems to think SKS might be a good PM is me. I think he has demonstrated a lot of skill in producing a plan and then sticking to it - and it’s been very effective in changing the Labour Party. Arguably he’s changed the Labour Party the fastest out of any leader in history.
No I agree with you.
If I were elected leader of the Labour Party after Corbyn and wanted to return it to power, I’d have tried to do almost exactly what SKS has done. It is truly astonishing that we are talking about a likely Labour majority in under 12 months after the 2019 result.
I don’t like how little Labour are offering right now by way of an alternative, but can entirely understand the logic of making the target as small as possible.
That includes making Keir as grey as possible. I hope some colour will emerge, though most of all I hope his apparent discipline and integrity are real, as that’s what we need most.
He’s exactly the leader we need in my view at the moment.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
UK PMIs had been very weak, so I don't think it's that surprising.
Not very weak but certainly below 50 for a few months although the services PMI has now moved back into positive territory.
Ok, I confess my ignorance. What's a PMI? Pre-Menstrual Indicator?
Purchasing Managers Index, above 50 indicating that purchasing managers are anticipating expansion.
Thank you, although in my case I would find a the other type of indicator more useful.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
We don’t live behind our means. We choose to not invest and to underfund public services.
Take a look at the UK's trade balance and government debt and you'll see that we most certainly do live beyond our means.
During the last Labour Government, people were annoyed that they were being seen too quickly by their GP. The 48 hour target was hit so often, that people were told they needed to book within 48 hours.
Under the last Labour Government, the cancer target was hit.
Under the last Labour Government, the A&E 4 hour target was hit in over 90% of cases.
Before the last Labour government, all targets were missed and the NHS was on its knees. After the last Labour government, all targets are being missed and the NHS is on its knees.
The Tories are the problem. It is hard to conclude they are anything but incompetent at running it.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
If your employer is any good the company should cover it.
insuring new gadgets
Almost never worth it, except if you're particularly good at breaking mobiles maybe.
travel to see relatives
It'll cost us about £30 in fuel at a guess.
In my (limited) experience, large companies do not like paying for Christmas parties any more. Possibly through cheese-paring but more likely because they are worried about being seen to discriminate against other religions.
Nope - it's because alcohol is involved and that will inevitably lead to problems that HR have to deal with....
Over 15GW of wind power again this morning after Orsted confirmed that they are proceeding with the Horsea 3 wind farm yesterday which will be the largest single windfarm in the world and should be on line by 2027. This is despite the cancellation of a number of major developments around the world with the company recognising and acknowledging that the policy structure in the UK made it attractive.
Amongst all the populist blundering incompetence wind is something the UK has got broadly right.
It's a good illustration of a positive long term policy adopted and persisted with.
In terms of “meaningful change”, for better or worse, to coin a recent SKS phrase, Davey must be up there alongside Osborne as CoE and Gove as Ed Sec of cabinet ministers other than the PM in the last decade.
Sadly the toxic legacy of having helped the Tories get in means Lib Dems are still hesitant to talk about their record in coalition.
I think Ed Davey is underrated as a politician too. We have got a bit too used to flamboyant scoundrels to value dull competence.
I think he will come over well at the debate stage of the campaign, being a bit more charismatic than Keir.
Over 15GW of wind power again this morning after Orsted confirmed that they are proceeding with the Horsea 3 wind farm yesterday which will be the largest single windfarm in the world and should be on line by 2027. This is despite the cancellation of a number of major developments around the world with the company recognising and acknowledging that the policy structure in the UK made it attractive.
Amongst all the populist blundering incompetence wind is something the UK has got broadly right.
It's a good illustration of a positive long term policy adopted and persisted with.
In terms of “meaningful change”, for better or worse, to coin a recent SKS phrase, Davey must be up there alongside Osborne as CoE and Gove as Ed Sec of cabinet ministers other than the PM in the last decade.
Sadly the toxic legacy of having helped the Tories get in means Lib Dems are still hesitant to talk about their record in coalition.
I think Ed Davey is underrated as a politician too. We have got a bit too used to flamboyant scoundrels to value dull competence.
I think he will come over well at the debate stage of the campaign, being a bit more charismatic than Keir.
I expect he won’t get a chance. It’ll be Sunak vs Keir, with a conference league debate of Davey, Yousaf, Tice, Price and whoever the Green leader is nowadays.
And Foxy's point goes further for the Tories and Labour, who are always in the game.
As a minor party you do need to get noticed - and Davey's worthiness will mostly be a disadvantage, as he'll never get to the point where it might be a strength. The Liberals and LibDems have, despite their small numbers, been very lucky in having a run of leading politicians all charismatic, in their different ways (and at least to begin with) - Grimond, Thorpe, young Steel, Ashdown, Kennedy, Clegg - when they've got noticed and built their position. The forgettable ones - Campbell, Cable, Swinson, etc. - haven't done so well.
I’m not sure I’d put Swinson in the forgettable category. She did raise her head above the parapet but flunked it, sadly.
Maybe forgettable was the wrong word for not so charismatic...
The only person who seems to think SKS might be a good PM is me. I think he has demonstrated a lot of skill in producing a plan and then sticking to it - and it’s been very effective in changing the Labour Party. Arguably he’s changed the Labour Party the fastest out of any leader in history.
No I agree with you.
If I were elected leader of the Labour Party after Corbyn and wanted to return it to power, I’d have tried to do almost exactly what SKS has done. It is truly astonishing that we are talking about a likely Labour majority in under 12 months after the 2019 result.
I don’t like how little Labour are offering right now by way of an alternative, but can entirely understand the logic of making the target as small as possible.
That includes making Keir as grey as possible. I hope some colour will emerge, though most of all I hope his apparent discipline and integrity are real, as that’s what we need most.
He’s exactly the leader we need in my view at the moment.
I think he'll be ok, and so will the Labour Government. I'm considering this here from the general competence viewpoint, rather than the ideology, which of course is happily very arguable.
He and his Government should be an improvement, although in that respect the bar is set exceeding low.
Sunak is not a technocrat, he’s a micro-manager. There’s a very big difference. He behaves like someone who has never run a big organisation. Because he never has, I guess.
What makes things worse is that he clearly has very little understanding of the UK or the people who live in it. That’s not a surprise given his trajectory - Winchester to Oxbridge to Silicon Valley to the City to Parliament, while marrying a billionaire’s daughter along the way - but what’s bizarre is his total lack of interest in finding out more. He has outsourced his research to the Mail and the Telegraph, and as you’d expect they’re not providing him with the full picture. He’d know that if he’d ever lived in the real world.
Interesting. In Hague's endorsement video of Rishi for the leadership (which I thought was actually quite good) Hague says the complete opposite - that Rishi is a man of discovery and limitless curiosity who gets up at 4.00 am to find out how cows are milked.
I think that actually reinforces the point
He is curious how cows are milked. He is not curious about the farmers who milk them, the economics of dairy farming, the farming community, DEFRA rules, animal welfare...
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
I’m currently reading Jeremy Heywood’s biography (by his wife), which offers an interesting glimpse inside the reality of government. In particular the relentless 24/7 treadmill of issues and problems, meetings and more meetings, people to see, and with the politics left for the politicians to consider. The chapters on the GFC are a great read; Brown comes out of it very well for his leadership and determination as the financial crisis unfolds, which played to all of his technical and political strengths. Yet failure on a stack of other fronts and his government was soon back behind in the polls.
My guess is that Sunak is ‘performing’ OK in all the meetings behind the scenes, but lacks any real political vision or instinct and allowing others to pull his strings when it comes to the politics, very much as Hague did (and of course LOTO is mostly politics, being PM is mostly administration). And unable to join one up with the other.
Thanks Ian. That sounds like one to read.
I am pleased to hear what it says about Brown because this is a line I have been pushing on this Site for many years, and I take flak for it. He was a poor PM generally, but he got the GFC right and indeed many other leaders at the time, notably the newly elected Obama, looked to him for leadership and they got it. The crisis played to his strengths, and he had the credibility in financial circles to carry it through.
Fwiw my view of Blair is kind of a mirror image of Brown. He was a good PM, who got the huge issue of Iraq terribly wrong.
It's all debatable, of course, but nice to know I have Heywood on my side.
Brown was caught asleep at the wheel as the crisis built, but once it broke he clearly rose to the challenge, and exercised leadership on the global stage, as you say. Heywood (through his wife) recounts how Brown was most unusually invited to the Euro-countries' summit, and how Obama asked him to lead on stuff, and how the US's original TARP plan was changed in the light of the UK's different approach.
The book is a great read for anyone interested in politics - I'm now into the chapters about the formation of the 2010 coalition. You have to make some allowance for his wife writing the book during (based on his recounted recollections) and after her husband's sad death, and there isn't a great deal of criticism in it - essentially Heywood was right on everything. Discounting for that, the civil service comes out of it pretty well, especially given some of the politicians they have to cope with.
Technically there were 3 Lib Dem wins at Blaby last night, District and County levels both big holds plus a gain at Parish level. Conversely Conservatives made two Town Council gains Bridgewater area, one from Labour other Lib Dems the second by 2 votes! Turnouts were 12 and 10% respectively.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
UK PMIs had been very weak, so I don't think it's that surprising.
Not very weak but certainly below 50 for a few months although the services PMI has now moved back into positive territory.
Ok, I confess my ignorance. What's a PMI? Pre-Menstrual Indicator?
The only person who seems to think SKS might be a good PM is me. I think he has demonstrated a lot of skill in producing a plan and then sticking to it - and it’s been very effective in changing the Labour Party. Arguably he’s changed the Labour Party the fastest out of any leader in history.
I'm quite hopeful too. He might of course disappoint but I don't see why people are so keen to assume he will. In a way it's better to expect disappointment because that way you can't be disappointed, you take disappointment off the table as it were, but I find this a rather joyless way of going about life.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
We don’t live behind our means. We choose to not invest and to underfund public services.
Take a look at the UK's trade balance and government debt and you'll see that we most certainly do live beyond our means.
The only person who seems to think SKS might be a good PM is me. I think he has demonstrated a lot of skill in producing a plan and then sticking to it - and it’s been very effective in changing the Labour Party. Arguably he’s changed the Labour Party the fastest out of any leader in history.
I'm quite hopeful too. He might of course disappoint but I don't see why people are so keen to assume he will. In a way it's better to expect disappointment because that way you can't be disappointed, you take disappointment off the table as it were, but I find this a rather joyless way of going about life.
I’ve never said he’d be a bad PM. My whole take on him was that the public wouldn’t vote for him over Boris once they’d gone H2H in a GE campaign, which I still believe. But that doesn’t matter now as Boris has gone.
The lefty remain tweeter in the thread header is right, Sunak should have gone for boring competence too. He can’t carry off a Boris tribute act and shouldn’t have tried
The only person who seems to think SKS might be a good PM is me. I think he has demonstrated a lot of skill in producing a plan and then sticking to it - and it’s been very effective in changing the Labour Party. Arguably he’s changed the Labour Party the fastest out of any leader in history.
I'm quite hopeful too. He might of course disappoint but I don't see why people are so keen to assume he will. In a way it's better to expect disappointment because that way you can't be disappointed, you take disappointment off the table as it were, but I find this a rather joyless way of going about life.
I’ve never said he’d be a bad PM. My whole take on him was that the public wouldn’t vote for him over Boris once they’d gone H2H in a GE campaign, which I still believe. But that doesn’t matter now as Boris has gone.
We will never find out, but I think Johnson wore out his welcome sufficiently that a H2H would not have gone his way.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
We as human beings are not suddenly more avaricious by nature. Instead we have a society and culture that, I would argue, is striving against our natures to feed a beast that is increasingly out of control.
To put it in plain English - our current model of capitalism, whilst bringing us incredible benefits in the past (not all of which were honourably gained, but there we go), is increasingly pushing our economy, society and culture to destruction.
It’s insidious. Bringing up a kid, for example, it is almost impossible to avoid imprinting on their developing brains addictive behaviours that will reduce their ability to delay gratification as an adult, even though we know the ability to delay gratification is closely correlated with many of the markers of a successful and fulfilling life.
To give just one example of this - if you watch an episode of Numberblocks on iPlayer these days it will automatically show you the next episode. Numberblocks is an awesome way to teach kids early maths, but the opt-out nature of watching repeat episodes is a classic way to hook someone into addictive behaviour.
It’s a tiny example in itself, but there a thousands of such examples. Our culture is eating itself. Hyperbole, some of you will shout. But I think that is only because we are all too deeply enmeshed in our current capitalist model to see it for what it is.
Capitalism - I wish. We haven't had capitalism, we have had landlordism. Every time in my lifetime, from the Barber Boom onwards, that government borrowing has allowed extra resources for the private sector, the private sector has failed Britain. Instead of investing in productive capital, the money went to feed the property Ponzi scheme.
Over 15GW of wind power again this morning after Orsted confirmed that they are proceeding with the Horsea 3 wind farm yesterday which will be the largest single windfarm in the world and should be on line by 2027. This is despite the cancellation of a number of major developments around the world with the company recognising and acknowledging that the policy structure in the UK made it attractive.
Amongst all the populist blundering incompetence wind is something the UK has got broadly right.
It's a good illustration of a positive long term policy adopted and persisted with.
In terms of “meaningful change”, for better or worse, to coin a recent SKS phrase, Davey must be up there alongside Osborne as CoE and Gove as Ed Sec of cabinet ministers other than the PM in the last decade.
Sadly the toxic legacy of having helped the Tories get in means Lib Dems are still hesitant to talk about their record in coalition.
I think Ed Davey is underrated as a politician too. We have got a bit too used to flamboyant scoundrels to value dull competence.
I think he will come over well at the debate stage of the campaign, being a bit more charismatic than Keir.
I expect he won’t get a chance. It’ll be Sunak vs Keir, with a conference league debate of Davey, Yousaf, Tice, Price and whoever the Green leader is nowadays.
And Foxy's point goes further for the Tories and Labour, who are always in the game.
As a minor party you do need to get noticed - and Davey's worthiness will mostly be a disadvantage, as he'll never get to the point where it might be a strength. The Liberals and LibDems have, despite their small numbers, been very lucky in having a run of leading politicians all charismatic, in their different ways (and at least to begin with) - Grimond, Thorpe, young Steel, Ashdown, Kennedy, Clegg - when they've got noticed and built their position. The forgettable ones - Campbell, Cable, Swinson, etc. - haven't done so well.
I’m not sure I’d put Swinson in the forgettable category. She did raise her head above the parapet but flunked it, sadly.
Maybe forgettable was the wrong word for not so charismatic...
To my surprise, she emerges as one of the culprits in The Great Post Office Scandal - not the worst, of course; that would be going some, but she definitely reflected the typically 'hands-off' approach to the PO which enabled the iniquities to proceed for years without proper accountablity.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
The ONS is just trying to get a bit of publicity, in a year these figures will be revised quietly and show growth.
A strange way to get publicity with a low key announcement a day before everything stops for 2 weeks!
Apart from the revision that showed less damage from the exceptional events of pandemic and lockdown revisions have been pretty trivial (like these) and pretty much equally up and down.
That's not true, the ONS has an average 0.56% upwards revision to GDP every year, it is the highest variation by any major statistics body. ONS undershoot is a very well known phenomenon in the city, even the BoE has commented on it previously.
My position is that of one who always votes Tory at GEs, but this time plans to vote Labour. So I am one of millions of Tories who are currently Lab/LD/Ref/DK. These are the votes that decide the next election. When I ask myself 'which party seems to act as if it want me to vote for them' currently the Tories would score nought out of 10, and Labour about 7-8 out of 10.
The main reason is that while in government - which carries a great burden - they are trying to tell me they are a party of the populist right and also the old Tory party. While a long list of the old centre Tory party have been chucked out or left in despair.
The constant repetition by many on here that "Labour has no policies" doesn't make it true, although what is true that those policies are not (yet) well-known. However, if anybody is seriously interested in Labour's emerging policies rather than simply claiming they don't have any, they could start by looking here:
O/T if anyone is looking for something to watch that will puncture the festive schmaltz there is a brilliant four part doc on Lockerbie on Sky. Incredibly interesting about the criminal investigation/spy agencies but mostly just incredibly moving, seriously moving.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
If your employer is any good the company should cover it.
insuring new gadgets
Almost never worth it, except if you're particularly good at breaking mobiles maybe.
travel to see relatives
It'll cost us about £30 in fuel at a guess.
In my (limited) experience, large companies do not like paying for Christmas parties any more. Possibly through cheese-paring but more likely because they are worried about being seen to discriminate against other religions.
Probably more the policing alcohol and related HR piffle.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
The ONS is just trying to get a bit of publicity, in a year these figures will be revised quietly and show growth.
A strange way to get publicity with a low key announcement a day before everything stops for 2 weeks!
Apart from the revision that showed less damage from the exceptional events of pandemic and lockdown revisions have been pretty trivial (like these) and pretty much equally up and down.
The main headline on the BBC website? I would say that was pretty good publicity.
The article suggests Roberts will try to broker a pragmatic, rather than strictly legal decision. We'll see.
One thing it might have mentioned is that three of the Republican attorneys who helped litigate Bush v Gore now sit on the Court.
Well, quite a lot of the press (e.g. the FT) failed to mention that all 7 members of the Colorado Supreme Court were Democrat appointees so I guess there has to be balance somewhere.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
The ONS is just trying to get a bit of publicity, in a year these figures will be revised quietly and show growth.
A strange way to get publicity with a low key announcement a day before everything stops for 2 weeks!
Apart from the revision that showed less damage from the exceptional events of pandemic and lockdown revisions have been pretty trivial (like these) and pretty much equally up and down.
That's not true, the ONS has an average 0.56% upwards revision to GDP every year, it is the highest variation by any major statistics body. ONS undershoot is a very well known phenomenon in the city, even the BoE has commented on it previously.
A routine announcement is hardly 'publicity seeking', though. The most interesting thing about it was the appearance of their spokesman on the Today program this morning, as he is retiring after 30years.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
We as human beings are not suddenly more avaricious by nature. Instead we have a society and culture that, I would argue, is striving against our natures to feed a beast that is increasingly out of control.
To put it in plain English - our current model of capitalism, whilst bringing us incredible benefits in the past (not all of which were honourably gained, but there we go), is increasingly pushing our economy, society and culture to destruction.
It’s insidious. Bringing up a kid, for example, it is almost impossible to avoid imprinting on their developing brains addictive behaviours that will reduce their ability to delay gratification as an adult, even though we know the ability to delay gratification is closely correlated with many of the markers of a successful and fulfilling life.
To give just one example of this - if you watch an episode of Numberblocks on iPlayer these days it will automatically show you the next episode. Numberblocks is an awesome way to teach kids early maths, but the opt-out nature of watching repeat episodes is a classic way to hook someone into addictive behaviour.
It’s a tiny example in itself, but there a thousands of such examples. Our culture is eating itself. Hyperbole, some of you will shout. But I think that is only because we are all too deeply enmeshed in our current capitalist model to see it for what it is.
Capitalism - I wish. We haven't had capitalism, we have had landlordism. Every time in my lifetime, from the Barber Boom onwards, that government borrowing has allowed extra resources for the private sector, the private sector has failed Britain. Instead of investing in productive capital, the money went to feed the property Ponzi scheme.
Entirely agree but the sentiment does have the same whiff about it as those modern day communists who say that we just need to implement Marx’s ideas properly.
My whole take on him was that the public wouldn’t vote for him over Boris once they’d gone H2H in a GE campaign, which I still believe.
They wouldn't have gone head to head.
BoZo would have run away, again.
Well that’s just ridiculous.
Funny how you’ve been at this for four, possibly seven, years and don’t get the ‘weirdly obsessed’ treatment. No one seems bothered by ‘Bozo’ like they are with ‘Sir Keir’ either
Mr. H, except that pro-capitalist people will acknowledge it's imperfect, and the system hasn't led to the hellish realms of the USSR or North Korea, unlike Communism.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
We as human beings are not suddenly more avaricious by nature. Instead we have a society and culture that, I would argue, is striving against our natures to feed a beast that is increasingly out of control.
To put it in plain English - our current model of capitalism, whilst bringing us incredible benefits in the past (not all of which were honourably gained, but there we go), is increasingly pushing our economy, society and culture to destruction.
It’s insidious. Bringing up a kid, for example, it is almost impossible to avoid imprinting on their developing brains addictive behaviours that will reduce their ability to delay gratification as an adult, even though we know the ability to delay gratification is closely correlated with many of the markers of a successful and fulfilling life.
To give just one example of this - if you watch an episode of Numberblocks on iPlayer these days it will automatically show you the next episode. Numberblocks is an awesome way to teach kids early maths, but the opt-out nature of watching repeat episodes is a classic way to hook someone into addictive behaviour.
It’s a tiny example in itself, but there a thousands of such examples. Our culture is eating itself. Hyperbole, some of you will shout. But I think that is only because we are all too deeply enmeshed in our current capitalist model to see it for what it is.
Capitalism - I wish. We haven't had capitalism, we have had landlordism. Every time in my lifetime, from the Barber Boom onwards, that government borrowing has allowed extra resources for the private sector, the private sector has failed Britain. Instead of investing in productive capital, the money went to feed the property Ponzi scheme.
Investing in productive capital is risky - if it fails the government wont bail you out, if it succeeds the government will tax you.
Instead its much safer to invest in the two things that the government always wants and always subsidises - rising property values and increasing consumer spending.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
The ONS is just trying to get a bit of publicity, in a year these figures will be revised quietly and show growth.
A strange way to get publicity with a low key announcement a day before everything stops for 2 weeks!
Apart from the revision that showed less damage from the exceptional events of pandemic and lockdown revisions have been pretty trivial (like these) and pretty much equally up and down.
The main headline on the BBC website? I would say that was pretty good publicity.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
The ONS is just trying to get a bit of publicity, in a year these figures will be revised quietly and show growth.
A strange way to get publicity with a low key announcement a day before everything stops for 2 weeks!
Apart from the revision that showed less damage from the exceptional events of pandemic and lockdown revisions have been pretty trivial (like these) and pretty much equally up and down.
The main headline on the BBC website? I would say that was pretty good publicity.
Thing is that the difference between +0.1 percent and -0.1 percent doesn't realy matter, and trying to calculate small differences between fuzzy numbers is a mug's game. (See also the overexcitement over point-to-point changes in polls.)
Neither of them is great, compared to the economic growth we really want to be able to continue to afford nice things. We're well below that, have been for years, and no quibbling about the measurements is going to change that.
The government's problem is twofold. Partly, the media obsession with a fairly arbitary definition, but also Rishi and Jeremy's obsession with the same thing. Rishi set the target, and there's a nontrivial risk that he won't meet it.
The constant repetition by many on here that "Labour has no policies" doesn't make it true, although what is true that those policies are not (yet) well-known. However, if anybody is seriously interested in Labour's emerging policies rather than simply claiming they don't have any, they could start by looking here:
Mr. H, except that pro-capitalist people will acknowledge it's imperfect, and the system hasn't led to the hellish realms of the USSR or North Korea, unlike Communism.
Oh I agree again - I didn’t mean to imply an equivalence between capitalism and communism but rather between Alan’s understandable complaint that we are not doing capitalism properly, and the perennial complaint that the horrors or NK and USSR are/were as a result of not doing communism properly.
Mr. H, except that pro-capitalist people will acknowledge it's imperfect, and the system hasn't led to the hellish realms of the USSR or North Korea, unlike Communism.
Oh I agree again - I didn’t mean to imply an equivalence between capitalism and communism but rather between Alan’s understandable complaint that we are not doing capitalism properly, and the perennial complaint that the horrors or NK and USSR are/were as a result of not doing communism properly.
Rent-seeking is a big problem (it actually ties in with yesterday's header and discussion about South Africa. People are more interested in squeezing out a bigger share of the pie, rather than growing the pie).
The constant repetition by many on here that "Labour has no policies" doesn't make it true, although what is true that those policies are not (yet) well-known. However, if anybody is seriously interested in Labour's emerging policies rather than simply claiming they don't have any, they could start by looking here:
Following the links will lead you to quite detailed briefings on each of the five core 'missions'. But it does involve reading.
Continuity ‘World Class’ everything. That used to annoy people who will love it now
“ Make sure there’s a world class teacher in every classroom”
I'm sure that could be simplified to making sure there is a teacher in every classroom and a lot of people who know the real state of education would be thinking over ambitious
The article suggests Roberts will try to broker a pragmatic, rather than strictly legal decision. We'll see.
One thing it might have mentioned is that three of the Republican attorneys who helped litigate Bush v Gore now sit on the Court.
Well, quite a lot of the press (e.g. the FT) failed to mention that all 7 members of the Colorado Supreme Court were Democrat appointees so I guess there has to be balance somewhere.
A typically asinine comment.
Colorado is a solidly Democratic state, so it is utterly unremarkable. Indeed if you had bothered to check out the justices themselves, you'd have noted that there is little about any of them that's politically ;as opposed to legally) notable. https://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/Justices.cfm
That a third of the U.S. Supreme Court participated as advocates for a political party on one side of one of the most politically charged (and legally unmoored in precedent) decisions in its history is slightly more worthy of note, to my mind.
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
The ONS is just trying to get a bit of publicity, in a year these figures will be revised quietly and show growth.
A strange way to get publicity with a low key announcement a day before everything stops for 2 weeks!
Apart from the revision that showed less damage from the exceptional events of pandemic and lockdown revisions have been pretty trivial (like these) and pretty much equally up and down.
That's not true, the ONS has an average 0.56% upwards revision to GDP every year, it is the highest variation by any major statistics body. ONS undershoot is a very well known phenomenon in the city, even the BoE has commented on it previously.
A routine announcement is hardly 'publicity seeking', though. The most interesting thing about it was the appearance of their spokesman on the Today program this morning, as he is retiring after 30years.
I didn't say it was publicity seeking, just that the ONS is known to underestimate growth.
The constant repetition by many on here that "Labour has no policies" doesn't make it true, although what is true that those policies are not (yet) well-known. However, if anybody is seriously interested in Labour's emerging policies rather than simply claiming they don't have any, they could start by looking here:
Following the links will lead you to quite detailed briefings on each of the five core 'missions'. But it does involve reading.
Continuity ‘World Class’ everything. That used to annoy people who will love it now
“ Make sure there’s a world class teacher in every classroom”
Yes, I agree that's a bit naff. Though what used to annoy people was when your bloke claimed everything was "world-beating" when it clearly wasn't.
Anyway, my point was simply that the claim that Labour doesn't have any policies is simply untrue. What folk think of those policies is an entirely different matter.
Sent out Christmas cards ft photos of him and his wife, photoshopped to stop him looking shorter than her
Donned military fatigues for a photoshoot
Two things that would be ridiculed relentlessly on here were it Boris, Sunak, or Farage, but ignored now. And if anyone does mention it… “weirdly obsessed”
Some rather disappointing and frankly unexpected revisals to GDP growth this morning which put us at risk of a technical recession: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-67799713
The weird thing is that the earnings data and the tax take from it both indicated that if anything economic activity was being underestimated, not over estimated. Curious.
The ONS is just trying to get a bit of publicity, in a year these figures will be revised quietly and show growth.
A strange way to get publicity with a low key announcement a day before everything stops for 2 weeks!
Apart from the revision that showed less damage from the exceptional events of pandemic and lockdown revisions have been pretty trivial (like these) and pretty much equally up and down.
That's not true, the ONS has an average 0.56% upwards revision to GDP every year, it is the highest variation by any major statistics body. ONS undershoot is a very well known phenomenon in the city, even the BoE has commented on it previously.
A routine announcement is hardly 'publicity seeking', though. The most interesting thing about it was the appearance of their spokesman on the Today program this morning, as he is retiring after 30years.
I didn't say it was publicity seeking, just that the ONS is known to underestimate growth.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
If your employer is any good the company should cover it.
insuring new gadgets
Almost never worth it, except if you're particularly good at breaking mobiles maybe.
travel to see relatives
It'll cost us about £30 in fuel at a guess.
In my (limited) experience, large companies do not like paying for Christmas parties any more. Possibly through cheese-paring but more likely because they are worried about being seen to discriminate against other religions.
Nope - it's because alcohol is involved and that will inevitably lead to problems that HR have to deal with....
Never been an issue at ours, then again we don't have an HR department (The MD consults our legal friends if anything serious comes up)
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
I had an interesting evening in the pub yesterday with old friends from university. Two objected to Starmer as you did - an empty suit. The guy on the left increasingly frustrated that Starmer isn’t Corbyn (I know, I know…)
Point was that even though they listed where Starmer is deficient, they recognise and call out that Sunak and the Tories are *more* deficient.
Even the “Labour will break the economy” line which has reinforced Tory votes before doesn’t work. The guy who was a 2019 Tory won’t vote for them in fear of what Labour might do, because whatever that is he is living the reality of what the Tories are already doing.
“I want to be able to afford to pay my bills” is a big motivator, even if you aren’t convinced the alternative will be much better. If a bit better is enough to keep you afloat, that will do. And that’s millions on millions of voters…
I cant see much difference between Sunak and Starmer which is why Im fairly relaxed about a Labour government. My main irritation is that it will be another wasted decade with more of the same failed policies.
The reason that the last decade was wasted was the dead end of Brexit.
Neither being in or out of the EU prevented us from addressing the real problems of our economy and society. Hence the Red Wall and Blue Wall both being annoyed. There are only so many deat cats that can be thrown on the table.
Few people want the real problem being addressed.
Because the real problem is that this country has for far too long lived beyond its means.
Which means that at some point living standards have to fall for most people.
And the longer this is delayed the harder the change will be.
I agree.
We have been selling off the family silver for years and been running up the credit cards to fund imported tat for decades.
Sooner or later the bailiff comes knocking.
Perhaps not the most authoritative study but an indication of how consumer spending has increased:
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
We as human beings are not suddenly more avaricious by nature. Instead we have a society and culture that, I would argue, is striving against our natures to feed a beast that is increasingly out of control.
To put it in plain English - our current model of capitalism, whilst bringing us incredible benefits in the past (not all of which were honourably gained, but there we go), is increasingly pushing our economy, society and culture to destruction.
It’s insidious. Bringing up a kid, for example, it is almost impossible to avoid imprinting on their developing brains addictive behaviours that will reduce their ability to delay gratification as an adult, even though we know the ability to delay gratification is closely correlated with many of the markers of a successful and fulfilling life.
To give just one example of this - if you watch an episode of Numberblocks on iPlayer these days it will automatically show you the next episode. Numberblocks is an awesome way to teach kids early maths, but the opt-out nature of watching repeat episodes is a classic way to hook someone into addictive behaviour.
It’s a tiny example in itself, but there a thousands of such examples. Our culture is eating itself. Hyperbole, some of you will shout. But I think that is only because we are all too deeply enmeshed in our current capitalist model to see it for what it is.
Capitalism - I wish. We haven't had capitalism, we have had landlordism. Every time in my lifetime, from the Barber Boom onwards, that government borrowing has allowed extra resources for the private sector, the private sector has failed Britain. Instead of investing in productive capital, the money went to feed the property Ponzi scheme.
Investing in productive capital is risky - if it fails the government wont bail you out, if it succeeds the government will tax you.
Instead its much safer to invest in the two things that the government always wants and always subsidises - rising property values and increasing consumer spending.
Not quite true, to give Rishi credit investment into our 5 axis CNC milling machine has been treated favourably tax-wise with the allowances.
During the last Labour Government, people were annoyed that they were being seen too quickly by their GP. The 48 hour target was hit so often, that people were told they needed to book within 48 hours.
Under the last Labour Government, the cancer target was hit.
Under the last Labour Government, the A&E 4 hour target was hit in over 90% of cases.
Before the last Labour government, all targets were missed and the NHS was on its knees. After the last Labour government, all targets are being missed and the NHS is on its knees.
The Tories are the problem. It is hard to conclude they are anything but incompetent at running it.
That isn't what people were complaining about. What happened was, because penalties were in place for any appointments made beyond 48 hours, GPs wouldn't let you book other than a regular slot appointment (e.g. a monthly blood test) unless they had slots left within that time period.
Therefore meaning people who wanted to be seen at all had to ring up at exactly 8 in the morning and hope they weren't stuck in a queue. Which they usually were.
So a lot of people were waiting five or six weeks to get an appointment anyway.
It's fair to say both systems have significant drawbacks, but that one was just silly.
Sent out Christmas cards ft photos of him and his wife, photoshopped to stop him looking shorter than her
Donned military fatigues for a photoshoot
Two things that would be ridiculed relentlessly on here were it Boris, Sunak, or Farage, but ignored now. And if anyone does mention it… “weirdly obsessed”
And a Guardian editorial (which is sceptical of the political merits if the decision). https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/21/the-guardian-view-on-trumps-legal-woes-in-colorado-he-needs-to-be-beaten-politically ...However, the case comes at a significant price. Some warn that the clause could be much more widely invoked against other candidates in future. But the most immediate consequence is that it once again fires up the former president’s base. Mr Trump is portraying it as another illegitimate act of persecution, part of the fictional witch-hunt against him – because he dares to speak for his supporters. Colorado’s supreme court justices were all appointed by Democrat governors (though the chief justice is a Republican and three of the other six registered as unaffiliated)...
The constant repetition by many on here that "Labour has no policies" doesn't make it true, although what is true that those policies are not (yet) well-known. However, if anybody is seriously interested in Labour's emerging policies rather than simply claiming they don't have any, they could start by looking here:
Following the links will lead you to quite detailed briefings on each of the five core 'missions'. But it does involve reading.
Continuity ‘World Class’ everything. That used to annoy people who will love it now
“ Make sure there’s a world class teacher in every classroom”
I'm sure that could be simplified to making sure there is a teacher in every classroom and a lot of people who know the real state of education would be thinking over ambitious
Particularly in light of the current recruitment crisis and the impending collapse of several teacher training courses both due to that and the usual drunken incompetence of the DfE.
I was thinking, today's probably their Christmas party. It might actually be the day when administration in education runs more smoothly if they're only serving by the glass not by the bottle.
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
Broadly good, but still stuck in the what governments have traditionally done mindset.
Fix something simple, like fitness and the food we eat. It's achievable, needs some but not loads of upfront investment and would make a massive difference to quality of life. It might not quickly filter through to the churn of economic statistics that dominate, but so what.
Sent out Christmas cards ft photos of him and his wife, photoshopped to stop him looking shorter than her
Donned military fatigues for a photoshoot
Two things that would be ridiculed relentlessly on here were it Boris, Sunak, or Farage, but ignored now. And if anyone does mention it… “weirdly obsessed”
My detailed research indicates that Mr Starmer is 5'8" and Mrs Starmer 5'6". I suspect Mrs Starmer removed her heels for the Xmas card.
And a Guardian editorial (which is sceptical of the political merits if the decision). https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/21/the-guardian-view-on-trumps-legal-woes-in-colorado-he-needs-to-be-beaten-politically ...However, the case comes at a significant price. Some warn that the clause could be much more widely invoked against other candidates in future. But the most immediate consequence is that it once again fires up the former president’s base. Mr Trump is portraying it as another illegitimate act of persecution, part of the fictional witch-hunt against him – because he dares to speak for his supporters. Colorado’s supreme court justices were all appointed by Democrat governors (though the chief justice is a Republican and three of the other six registered as unaffiliated)...
As this will end up in the Supreme Court, who will vote for Trump to be allowed to go back in the ballot so he can seize power again because they're even more transparent in their love for Trump than KC is, it's all rather irrelevant.
the only way this might cause Trump a problem is if he's not on the ballots in places like California and New York for the primaries, if the SC doesn't decide for the filing deadline.
That might actually hand the nomination to a challenger.
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
I believe the £38,700 threshold for migrant workers still applies to individual immigrants however
Doesn't make any difference - it's a badly implemented change that Reform will make hay with - remember details don't actually matter here it's a simple story of a change that actually doesn't help anyone..
Classic whataboutary from Alanbrooke. The only thing they have left is to try to paint others as all the same. The final bunker.
I am surprised by how bad Sunak is, even with his lack of experience you might have thought that the people around him would create some basic competence and political common, but no.
LOL I realise you want to think SKS is great PM material but he isnt. There is very little difference between him and Sunk it will be continuity crap.
Yawn. Same old, same old, last line of defence stuff.
Sunak is all about the headlines.
SKS is all about staying out of them. In 5 months there could be an election and he hasnt got the balls to say anything. An empty suit.
The UK press is so biased against Labour, staying out of the papers is the best outcome a Labour leader can hope for.
But the broadcast media isnt, and he avoids that too. Amdist all the fun of saying how crap the current government is - and they are crap - no-one is putting any scrutiny on what will replace them. The only positive from this is expectations wont be high but this will not be like 1997 with people who had an agenda it will be more like shuffling chairs at the parish council.
I'm pretty sure I heard him being interviewed on the Today programme the other day.
Thats simply hiding in plain sight. I understand the logic of not interrupting your opponent when hes making a mistake, but at some point SKS has to come out of the cupboard and make a few of his own.
Ha ha. Starmer really can't win can he. If he isn't appearing in the media, he's hiding. If he does an interview with the BBC's flagship current affairs programme he's "hiding in plain sight". Remind me which party's leader refused to do an interview with Andrew Neil at the last election and then hid in a fridge to avoid another? Give me a break.
Well why should he win ? No other politician can either, part of the job is upsetting people and seeing how they handle it. SKS is simply doing what Boris did but in a more refined way.
Yes Starmer doing an interview is entirely like Johnson not doing one. Going on the radio is just like hiding in a fridge. Black is white. Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia. There are no American tanks in Baghdad.
One characteristic of politicians is that the more we see of them, the less we like them. Sunaks polling goes up when parliament isn't sitting and he is not doing photo ops etc.
Clearly that becomes problematic during a campaign, but Starmer has mastered the non-appearance appearance. He does the interview but says nothing of interest. Box ticked on appearing, but nothing to annoy voters. Sheer genius.
Isn't this just another example of people underestimating Starmer's skills as a politician? Folk on here seem to be criticising him for mastering the art of not annoying the voters. Surely that's a point in his favour? I say this BTW as someone who was not massively enthusiastic about the man. I didn't vote for him to be leader. But in today's world of negative politics if you can show up and not piss people off I think you're winning.
Yes. Someone* posted recently that being LOTO was mostly about politics, being PM mostly about administration. I think that an astute observation. In particular we may well see a surprisingly competent PM Starmer by this time next year.
Being PM is about administration, which both Sunak and Starmer are more competent at than their recent predecessors as party leaders and politics, which Sunak is worse at than Boris. Starmer at the moment seems reasonably good at the politics but the test of that will come in power with a difficult economy as he still needs it to be re elected
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
The truth is, we've already had lots of experiments with various school systems - selective, comprehensive, LEA, direct grant, grant maintained, city academies, academies, academy trusts, vocational, academic, and on and on. The data goes back 80 years and is genuinely plentiful.
The problem is they all show one thing - our education system never achieves what we ostensibly want it too.
And that's because we've never done the one thing that might make a difference - made per pupil funding in state schools the same level as private schools.
And why not? Because no politician is willing to spend the money.
As we also see in transport, health, power generation...
During the last Labour Government, people were annoyed that they were being seen too quickly by their GP. The 48 hour target was hit so often, that people were told they needed to book within 48 hours.
Under the last Labour Government, the cancer target was hit.
Under the last Labour Government, the A&E 4 hour target was hit in over 90% of cases.
Before the last Labour government, all targets were missed and the NHS was on its knees. After the last Labour government, all targets are being missed and the NHS is on its knees.
The Tories are the problem. It is hard to conclude they are anything but incompetent at running it.
That isn't what people were complaining about. What happened was, because penalties were in place for any appointments made beyond 48 hours, GPs wouldn't let you book other than a regular slot appointment (e.g. a monthly blood test) unless they had slots left within that time period.
Therefore meaning people who wanted to be seen at all had to ring up at exactly 8 in the morning and hope they weren't stuck in a queue. Which they usually were.
So a lot of people were waiting five or six weeks to get an appointment anyway.
It's fair to say both systems have significant drawbacks, but that one was just silly.
The problem with 48-hour GP appointments should have been foreseen by anyone with experience of pregnancy. Tony Blair seemed astonished when it was pointed out to him by a television audience. Similarly, David Cameron told of a constituent explaining to him the flaws in his legal aid cuts. Policy-making was outsourced to bright young management consultants rather than being debated at conference.
And a Guardian editorial (which is sceptical of the political merits if the decision). https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/21/the-guardian-view-on-trumps-legal-woes-in-colorado-he-needs-to-be-beaten-politically ...However, the case comes at a significant price. Some warn that the clause could be much more widely invoked against other candidates in future. But the most immediate consequence is that it once again fires up the former president’s base. Mr Trump is portraying it as another illegitimate act of persecution, part of the fictional witch-hunt against him – because he dares to speak for his supporters. Colorado’s supreme court justices were all appointed by Democrat governors (though the chief justice is a Republican and three of the other six registered as unaffiliated)...
If Trump is barred from the ballot in more blue states the primary impact that has is on his chances of getting the GOP nomination.
Only if he is barred from the ballots in swing states like Michigan would that impact his general election chances too
During the last Labour Government, people were annoyed that they were being seen too quickly by their GP. The 48 hour target was hit so often, that people were told they needed to book within 48 hours.
Under the last Labour Government, the cancer target was hit.
Under the last Labour Government, the A&E 4 hour target was hit in over 90% of cases.
Before the last Labour government, all targets were missed and the NHS was on its knees. After the last Labour government, all targets are being missed and the NHS is on its knees.
The Tories are the problem. It is hard to conclude they are anything but incompetent at running it.
That isn't what people were complaining about. What happened was, because penalties were in place for any appointments made beyond 48 hours, GPs wouldn't let you book other than a regular slot appointment (e.g. a monthly blood test) unless they had slots left within that time period.
Therefore meaning people who wanted to be seen at all had to ring up at exactly 8 in the morning and hope they weren't stuck in a queue. Which they usually were.
So a lot of people were waiting five or six weeks to get an appointment anyway.
It's fair to say both systems have significant drawbacks, but that one was just silly.
The problem with 48-hour GP appointments should have been foreseen by anyone with experience of pregnancy. Tony Blair seemed astonished when it was pointed out to him by a television audience. Similarly, David Cameron told of a constituent explaining to him the flaws in his legal aid cuts. Policy-making was outsourced to bright young management consultants rather than being debated at conference.
Sent out Christmas cards ft photos of him and his wife, photoshopped to stop him looking shorter than her
Donned military fatigues for a photoshoot
Two things that would be ridiculed relentlessly on here were it Boris, Sunak, or Farage, but ignored now. And if anyone does mention it… “weirdly obsessed”
My detailed research indicates that Mr Starmer is 5'8" and Mrs Starmer 5'6". I suspect Mrs Starmer removed her heels for the Xmas card.
She is a heeluva catch to be fair, but more importantly are they sole mates?
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
The truth is, we've already had lots of experiments with various school systems - selective, comprehensive, LEA, direct grant, grant maintained, city academies, academies, academy trusts, vocational, academic, and on and on. The data goes back 80 years and is genuinely plentiful.
The problem is they all show one thing - our education system never achieves what we ostensibly want it too.
And that's because we've never done the one thing that might make a difference - made per pupil funding in state schools the same level as private schools.
And why not? Because no politician is willing to spend the money.
As we also see in transport, health, power generation...
I'd argue it's more fundamental than that: you say: "what we ostensibly want it too."
But what do we want the education system to do? What are its aims?
Sent out Christmas cards ft photos of him and his wife, photoshopped to stop him looking shorter than her
Donned military fatigues for a photoshoot
Two things that would be ridiculed relentlessly on here were it Boris, Sunak, or Farage, but ignored now. And if anyone does mention it… “weirdly obsessed”
My detailed research indicates that Mr Starmer is 5'8" and Mrs Starmer 5'6". I suspect Mrs Starmer removed her heels for the Xmas card.
She is a heeluva catch to be fair, but more importantly are they sole mates?
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
The truth is, we've already had lots of experiments with various school systems - selective, comprehensive, LEA, direct grant, grant maintained, city academies, academies, academy trusts, vocational, academic, and on and on. The data goes back 80 years and is genuinely plentiful.
The problem is they all show one thing - our education system never achieves what we ostensibly want it too.
And that's because we've never done the one thing that might make a difference - made per pupil funding in state schools the same level as private schools.
And why not? Because no politician is willing to spend the money.
As we also see in transport, health, power generation...
I'd argue it's more fundamental than that: you say: "what we ostensibly want it too."
But what do we want the education system to do? What are its aims?
Well, yes. That's definitely the thing we've never resolved.
But I would say the snag is what we ostensibly want it to do (educate children) and what it is funded to actually do (provide a less than full time babysitting service) are incompatible.
This is also why we end up with a disjointed shambles over school days and holidays.
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
The truth is, we've already had lots of experiments with various school systems - selective, comprehensive, LEA, direct grant, grant maintained, city academies, academies, academy trusts, vocational, academic, and on and on. The data goes back 80 years and is genuinely plentiful.
The problem is they all show one thing - our education system never achieves what we ostensibly want it too.
And that's because we've never done the one thing that might make a difference - made per pupil funding in state schools the same level as private schools.
And why not? Because no politician is willing to spend the money.
As we also see in transport, health, power generation...
Sixth Form colleges appear to work. Perhaps partly because they don't get effed around with quite so often.
Resources, of course, is why the original postwar tripartite system was such a failure for everyone but the grammar school kids. Not much has changed since, in that respect.
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
It's all a bit Elon Musk tech-bro, from a world where software experiments can be devised over breakfast with the results in by tea-time.
And much as I yearn for evidence-based policy, we must remember even the targets might be subject to political debate. For instance, is the aim of secondary education to increase equality or the number of grade 9s or Pisa rankings or university entry? Does a high conviction rate signify a working criminal justice system or one that has failed to deter or prevent crime?
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
Evolution and devolution, not revolution.
If the changes are small, nothing too bad is going to happen if they go wrong.
And give different parts of the country the power and heft to try different things to see what happens. (We've seen it a bit in education, not to Scotland's favour.)
One of the morbid signs of this government is the way that they poke their noses in to the small bits of autonomy that councils and mayors have.
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
Evolution and devolution, not revolution.
If the changes are small, nothing too bad is going to happen if they go wrong.
And give different parts of the country the power and heft to try different things to see what happens. (We've seen it a bit in education, not to Scotland's favour.)
One of the morbid signs of this government is the way that they poke their noses in to the small bits of autonomy that councils and mayors have.
The public want powers devolved but hate a post code lottery.
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
The truth is, we've already had lots of experiments with various school systems - selective, comprehensive, LEA, direct grant, grant maintained, city academies, academies, academy trusts, vocational, academic, and on and on. The data goes back 80 years and is genuinely plentiful.
The problem is they all show one thing - our education system never achieves what we ostensibly want it too.
And that's because we've never done the one thing that might make a difference - made per pupil funding in state schools the same level as private schools.
And why not? Because no politician is willing to spend the money.
As we also see in transport, health, power generation...
Sixth Form colleges appear to work. Perhaps partly because they don't get effed around with quite so often.
Resources, of course, is why the original postwar tripartite system was such a failure for everyone but the grammar school kids. Not much has changed since, in that respect.
I've been impressed by my eldest daughter's sixth form college.
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
It's all a bit Elon Musk tech-bro, from a world where software experiments can be devised over breakfast with the results in by tea-time.
And much as I yearn for evidence-based policy, we must remember even the targets might be subject to political debate. For instance, is the aim of secondary education to increase equality or the number of grade 9s or Pisa rankings or university entry? Does a high conviction rate signify a working criminal justice system or one that has failed to deter or prevent crime?
There are thing for which it might work very well, though. Energy; transport; house building; military procurement, etc.
Sent out Christmas cards ft photos of him and his wife, photoshopped to stop him looking shorter than her
Donned military fatigues for a photoshoot
Two things that would be ridiculed relentlessly on here were it Boris, Sunak, or Farage, but ignored now. And if anyone does mention it… “weirdly obsessed”
My detailed research indicates that Mr Starmer is 5'8" and Mrs Starmer 5'6". I suspect Mrs Starmer removed her heels for the Xmas card.
Sent out Christmas cards ft photos of him and his wife, photoshopped to stop him looking shorter than her
Donned military fatigues for a photoshoot
Two things that would be ridiculed relentlessly on here were it Boris, Sunak, or Farage, but ignored now. And if anyone does mention it… “weirdly obsessed”
Morning Sam, any links?
Combat Keir, and Sir Keir showing off a mean left jab
Personally, I would like to vote for a political party that had the following manifesto:
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
How, within the space of one government, do you iterate trials of school policy ? Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out. And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
It's all a bit Elon Musk tech-bro, from a world where software experiments can be devised over breakfast with the results in by tea-time.
And much as I yearn for evidence-based policy, we must remember even the targets might be subject to political debate. For instance, is the aim of secondary education to increase equality or the number of grade 9s or Pisa rankings or university entry? Does a high conviction rate signify a working criminal justice system or one that has failed to deter or prevent crime?
I would have said, personally - and this is speaking as a history teacher - that the key goal of any education system should be to instil decent levels of literacy, numeracy and the ability to interact with others. To this we should probably increasingly add the best way to use technology efficiently and safely. Once you've got those in place, the rest will follow much more easily, including things like lifelong learning and retraining.
Certainly that should be the be-all and the end-all-here of primary schools. Anything on top is gravy (and actually, a lot of the more specialist stuff they are taught in primary schools is, in my experience, incorrect anyway. Not surprising given their teachers aren't specialists and usually have only a page of a bad textbook to work on, but it does make you wonder what good it is).
Unfortunately, our current school system not only doesn't do that particularly well but through Ofsted's mad curriculum framework, poor quality assessments that assess the wrong things in the wrong ways, policy decisions on 'inclusion' that leaves little time for supporting children properly and means inadequate provision is made for those who can't cope in main schools, and the Luddite like attitude of the DfE to technology (they are so bad they actually can't use email efficiently) it's actively militating against them.
Comments
Christmas will cost the average British household more than £1,800 this year - triple what was spent 30 years ago even when adjusted for inflation, a study found today.
Households spending extra on food, going out and bigger presents for family or friends are behind the 290 per cent rise on 1993 which accounts for higher prices.
Experts at MoneySuperMarket carried out 'the most comprehensive ever analysis of how much Christmas costs', analysing 24 data points including some less obvious ones such as travel to see relatives, joining a work party and insuring new gadgets.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12831257/festive-season-price-tripled-brits-spend-thousands.html
The first real evidence of how effective he's likely to be in government is only going to come if and when the opposition talks with the civil service start.
Labour have conspicuously not been in a rush over this - but the future of Case (and his possible replacement) might factor into that.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/dec/22/five-new-species-of-soft-furred-hedgehogs-discovered-in-south-east-asia
"Scientists have identified five new species of soft-furred hedgehogs from south-east Asia.
Two of the species discovered are entirely new to science, while three have been elevated from subspecies level by researchers, who carried out DNA analysis as well as detailed physical observations of the mammals."
The vibe on medical social media is for rejection, but always difficult to judge sentiment.
The book is a great read for anyone interested in politics - I'm now into the chapters about the formation of the 2010 coalition. You have to make some allowance for his wife writing the book during (based on his recounted recollections) and after her husband's sad death, and there isn't a great deal of criticism in it - essentially Heywood was right on everything. Discounting for that, the civil service comes out of it pretty well, especially given some of the politicians they have to cope with.
One for the last minute Xmas list!
Apart from the revision that showed less damage from the exceptional events of pandemic and lockdown revisions have been pretty trivial (like these) and pretty much equally up and down.
If your employer is any good the company should cover it.
insuring new gadgets
Almost never worth it, except if you're particularly good at breaking mobiles maybe.
travel to see relatives
It'll cost us about £30 in fuel at a guess.
We as human beings are not suddenly more avaricious by nature. Instead we have a society and culture that, I would argue, is striving against our natures to feed a beast that is increasingly out of control.
To put it in plain English - our current model of capitalism, whilst bringing us incredible benefits in the past (not all of which were honourably gained, but there we go), is increasingly pushing our economy, society and culture to destruction.
It’s insidious. Bringing up a kid, for example, it is almost impossible to avoid imprinting on their developing brains addictive behaviours that will reduce their ability to delay gratification as an adult, even though we know the ability to delay gratification is closely correlated with many of the markers of a successful and fulfilling life.
To give just one example of this - if you watch an episode of Numberblocks on iPlayer these days it will automatically show you the next episode. Numberblocks is an awesome way to teach kids early maths, but the opt-out nature of watching repeat episodes is a classic way to hook someone into addictive behaviour.
It’s a tiny example in itself, but there a thousands of such examples. Our culture is eating itself. Hyperbole, some of you will shout. But I think that is only because we are all too deeply enmeshed in our current capitalist model to see it for what it is.
As a minor party you do need to get noticed - and Davey's worthiness will mostly be a disadvantage, as he'll never get to the point where it might be a strength. The Liberals and LibDems have, despite their small numbers, been very lucky in having a run of leading politicians all charismatic, in their different ways (and at least to begin with) - Grimond, Thorpe, young Steel, Ashdown, Kennedy, Clegg - when they've got noticed and built their position. The forgettable ones - Campbell, Cable, Swinson, etc. - haven't done so well.
If I were elected leader of the Labour Party after Corbyn and wanted to return it to power, I’d have tried to do almost exactly what SKS has done. It is truly astonishing that we are talking about a likely Labour majority in under 12 months after the 2019 result.
I don’t like how little Labour are offering right now by way of an alternative, but can entirely understand the logic of making the target as small as possible.
That includes making Keir as grey as possible. I hope some colour will emerge, though most of all I hope his apparent discipline and integrity are real, as that’s what we need most.
He’s exactly the leader we need in my view at the moment.
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/ikbj/pnbp
https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/governmentpublicsectorandtaxes/publicsectorfinance/timeseries/hf6x/pusf
Under the last Labour Government, the cancer target was hit.
Under the last Labour Government, the A&E 4 hour target was hit in over 90% of cases.
Before the last Labour government, all targets were missed and the NHS was on its knees. After the last Labour government, all targets are being missed and the NHS is on its knees.
The Tories are the problem. It is hard to conclude they are anything but incompetent at running it.
What is an "Ed Davey"? Is it a shoe shop?
He and his Government should be an improvement, although in that respect the bar is set exceeding low.
The Supreme Court may become the decisive player in the 2024 election.
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/21/john-roberts-donald-trump-supreme-court-election-00132975
The article suggests Roberts will try to broker a pragmatic, rather than strictly legal decision.
We'll see.
One thing it might have mentioned is that three of the Republican attorneys who helped litigate Bush v Gore now sit on the Court.
He is curious how cows are milked. He is not curious about the farmers who milk them, the economics of dairy farming, the farming community, DEFRA rules, animal welfare...
Conversely Conservatives made two Town Council gains Bridgewater area, one from Labour other Lib Dems the second by 2 votes! Turnouts were 12 and 10% respectively.
The lefty remain tweeter in the thread header is right, Sunak should have gone for boring competence too. He can’t carry off a Boris tribute act and shouldn’t have tried
Every time in my lifetime, from the Barber Boom onwards, that government borrowing has allowed extra resources for the private sector, the private sector has failed Britain.
Instead of investing in productive capital, the money went to feed the property Ponzi scheme.
The main reason is that while in government - which carries a great burden - they are trying to tell me they are a party of the populist right and also the old Tory party. While a long list of the old centre Tory party have been chucked out or left in despair.
https://labour.org.uk/missions/
Following the links will lead you to quite detailed briefings on each of the five core 'missions'. But it does involve reading.
BoZo would have run away, again.
The most interesting thing about it was the appearance of their spokesman on the Today program this morning, as he is retiring after 30years.
Funny how you’ve been at this for four, possibly seven, years and don’t get the ‘weirdly obsessed’ treatment. No one seems bothered by ‘Bozo’ like they are with ‘Sir Keir’ either
Mr. H, except that pro-capitalist people will acknowledge it's imperfect, and the system hasn't led to the hellish realms of the USSR or North Korea, unlike Communism.
Instead its much safer to invest in the two things that the government always wants and always subsidises - rising property values and increasing consumer spending.
Neither of them is great, compared to the economic growth we really want to be able to continue to afford nice things. We're well below that, have been for years, and no quibbling about the measurements is going to change that.
The government's problem is twofold. Partly, the media obsession with a fairly arbitary definition, but also Rishi and Jeremy's obsession with the same thing. Rishi set the target, and there's a nontrivial risk that he won't meet it.
“ Make sure there’s a world class teacher in every classroom”
Colorado is a solidly Democratic state, so it is utterly unremarkable.
Indeed if you had bothered to check out the justices themselves, you'd have noted that there is little about any of them that's politically ;as opposed to legally) notable.
https://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Supreme_Court/Justices.cfm
That a third of the U.S. Supreme Court participated as advocates for a political party on one side of one of the most politically charged (and legally unmoored in precedent) decisions in its history is slightly more worthy of note, to my mind.
Anyway, my point was simply that the claim that Labour doesn't have any policies is simply untrue. What folk think of those policies is an entirely different matter.
Sent out Christmas cards ft photos of him and his wife, photoshopped to stop him looking shorter than her
Donned military fatigues for a photoshoot
Two things that would be ridiculed relentlessly on here were it Boris, Sunak, or Farage, but ignored now. And if anyone does mention it… “weirdly obsessed”
Look, this is all rather difficult, and who knows what the future will bring. I can't make any definitive promises about getting the economy moving, of reducing taxes, but these are going to be our guiding principles:
1. We're evidence based. Schooling. Policing. Health. You name it, we plan to run lots of trials. We have no idea which ideas will work. But unless we try things with a sensible system for evaluating results, we'll still never know.
2. Iteration. Iteration. Iteration. We're not going to rest on our laurels. We're going to be constantly seeing if we can improve things. Everything will be based on publicly available targets, and you will be able to judge us on those goals.
3. We're not that smart. We're going to make mistakes. Flip flopping is isn't bad, it's the correct response to new information that challenges existing views.
4. We will look for root causes, not try and treat symptoms. Why is it that the British economy is importing (say) certain types of labor? What is it we can change with the tax, benefit and education systems that makes it so that British people are more likely to be employed in these roles? Why is it that there are so few homes being built?
5. We won't lie to you. Things are going to be tough. There are an increasing number of people out there, all of whom want to live Western lives and they're willing to work longer and harder, because they're poorer. There's no free lunch and we can't simply shut ourselves off from the world.
Therefore meaning people who wanted to be seen at all had to ring up at exactly 8 in the morning and hope they weren't stuck in a queue. Which they usually were.
So a lot of people were waiting five or six weeks to get an appointment anyway.
It's fair to say both systems have significant drawbacks, but that one was just silly.
Colorado ruling fuels efforts in other blue states to bar Trump from the ballot
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/12/21/colorado-trump-ruling-blue-states-00133009
And a Guardian editorial (which is sceptical of the political merits if the decision).
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/21/the-guardian-view-on-trumps-legal-woes-in-colorado-he-needs-to-be-beaten-politically
...However, the case comes at a significant price. Some warn that the clause could be much more widely invoked against other candidates in future. But the most immediate consequence is that it once again fires up the former president’s base. Mr Trump is portraying it as another illegitimate act of persecution, part of the fictional witch-hunt against him – because he dares to speak for his supporters. Colorado’s supreme court justices were all appointed by Democrat governors (though the chief justice is a Republican and three of the other six registered as unaffiliated)...
I was thinking, today's probably their Christmas party. It might actually be the day when administration in education runs more smoothly if they're only serving by the glass not by the bottle.
Fix something simple, like fitness and the food we eat. It's achievable, needs some but not loads of upfront investment and would make a massive difference to quality of life. It might not quickly filter through to the churn of economic statistics that dominate, but so what.
I suspect Mrs Starmer removed her heels for the Xmas card.
the only way this might cause Trump a problem is if he's not on the ballots in places like California and New York for the primaries, if the SC doesn't decide for the filing deadline.
That might actually hand the nomination to a challenger.
But it seems unlikely.
Results are complicated by cohort, and take years to see out.
And I would guess most parents would not be particularly keen on a mass parallel experiment with their kids as test subjects.
Your general point isn't a bad one, but it ignores the difficulties inherent in political, as opposed to commercial decisions.
The problem is they all show one thing - our education system never achieves what we ostensibly want it too.
And that's because we've never done the one thing that might make a difference - made per pupil funding in state schools the same level as private schools.
And why not? Because no politician is willing to spend the money.
As we also see in transport, health, power generation...
Only if he is barred from the ballots in swing states like Michigan would that impact his general election chances too
Well, for a given value of 'bright.'
But what do we want the education system to do? What are its aims?
But I would say the snag is what we ostensibly want it to do (educate children) and what it is funded to actually do (provide a less than full time babysitting service) are incompatible.
This is also why we end up with a disjointed shambles over school days and holidays.
Perhaps partly because they don't get effed around with quite so often.
Resources, of course, is why the original postwar tripartite system was such a failure for everyone but the grammar school kids. Not much has changed since, in that respect.
And much as I yearn for evidence-based policy, we must remember even the targets might be subject to political debate. For instance, is the aim of secondary education to increase equality or the number of grade 9s or Pisa rankings or university entry? Does a high conviction rate signify a working criminal justice system or one that has failed to deter or prevent crime?
If the changes are small, nothing too bad is going to happen if they go wrong.
And give different parts of the country the power and heft to try different things to see what happens. (We've seen it a bit in education, not to Scotland's favour.)
One of the morbid signs of this government is the way that they poke their noses in to the small bits of autonomy that councils and mayors have.
Energy; transport; house building; military procurement, etc.
https://x.com/scottygoesagain/status/1737951971233915254?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Big Keir
https://x.com/terryfuck45/status/1737780883279491383?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
Certainly that should be the be-all and the end-all-here of primary schools. Anything on top is gravy (and actually, a lot of the more specialist stuff they are taught in primary schools is, in my experience, incorrect anyway. Not surprising given their teachers aren't specialists and usually have only a page of a bad textbook to work on, but it does make you wonder what good it is).
Unfortunately, our current school system not only doesn't do that particularly well but through Ofsted's mad curriculum framework, poor quality assessments that assess the wrong things in the wrong ways, policy decisions on 'inclusion' that leaves little time for supporting children properly and means inadequate provision is made for those who can't cope in main schools, and the Luddite like attitude of the DfE to technology (they are so bad they actually can't use email efficiently) it's actively militating against them.
All while on a shoestring budget.