Howdy, Stranger!

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

The LDs would do better at the election with Daisy Cooper as leader – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,159
edited January 14 in General
imageThe LDs would do better at the election with Daisy Cooper as leader – politicalbetting.com

I dont know whether LD Leader Ed Davey is going to survive in the role till the general election but he hasn’t been helped by the recent focus on him.

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 51,814
    First unlike Sir Ed!
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,068
    Second
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    “NEARLY 4,000 asylum seekers have been caught pretending to be children to get into Britain — some at least 30 years old.

    About 45 per cent of the 8,766 “kids” checked by border officials since the start of 2020 turned out to be adults.”

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25273358/migrants-pretending-kids-britain/
  • Ed seems to get no coverage at all, which is OK for Starmer who wants to win by default and seems to operate on a basis that no coverage is better than any risky coverage, but for the Lib Dems they need to do something to get the oxygen of publicity.

    Its not just that the Post Office scandal is bad for Ed, its that its the only thing most people will now associate with him as there's been a complete vacuum of coverage for anything else.

    Replacing him with Daisy Cooper is a good idea. I don't know much about what if anything she stands for, but she's a fresh face and telegenic and doesn't look like an invisible sidekick to Starmer.

    What have the Lib Dems got to lose?
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,549
    edited January 8
    There was this Panorama programme in 2015 but didn't get as much attention as it might have done.

    "Trouble at Post Office - Panorama - 17th August 2015"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3by7G0VQ3A

    https://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/p02z27ft
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited January 8
    isam said:

    “NEARLY 4,000 asylum seekers have been caught pretending to be children to get into Britain — some at least 30 years old.

    About 45 per cent of the 8,766 “kids” checked by border officials since the start of 2020 turned out to be adults.”

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25273358/migrants-pretending-kids-britain/

    The assumption here is that if you say you're a child but the Home Office classify you as an adult you were "caught" and you're actually an adult. The charities that are working with them say that the Home Office is routinely classifying people who are actually children as adults.

    In 2022, at GMIAU we have seen an increase in the number of children being referred to us
    because the Home Office have placed them in adult accommodation having wrongly
    deemed them to be adults. Of the 15 referrals we received by June this year, 11 had their age
    wrongly changed by the Home Office to make them an adult. Over half of these children
    have now had their age accepted by their local authority and 4 of the remaining 5 continue
    to wait for an outcome. Nationwide, figures from 64 local authorities collected by the Helen
    Bamber Foundation show that in January to March 2022, 211 young people were referred to
    children’s services after having been sent to adult accommodation or detention. Two thirds
    were found to actually be children - 150 children had been placed in adult accommodation
    or detention in only three months.

    https://gmiau.org/age-assessments-2209/
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494
    edited January 8
    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Oppenheimer again. Murphy this time 👎

    Then again there were no stand out films in 2023.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Oppenheimer again. Murphy this time 👎

    Then again there were no stand out films in 2023.
    This bit is so… yuk

    https://x.com/filmwithyas/status/1744174184236777839?s=20
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129
    https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/lauren-boebert-silt-incident-active-investigation-police-jayson-boebert/

    Ms Boebert is following the Ed Davey strategy: so long as they're talking about me...
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,033

    Ed seems to get no coverage at all, which is OK for Starmer who wants to win by default and seems to operate on a basis that no coverage is better than any risky coverage, but for the Lib Dems they need to do something to get the oxygen of publicity.

    Its not just that the Post Office scandal is bad for Ed, its that its the only thing most people will now associate with him as there's been a complete vacuum of coverage for anything else.

    Replacing him with Daisy Cooper is a good idea. I don't know much about what if anything she stands for, but she's a fresh face and telegenic and doesn't look like an invisible sidekick to Starmer.

    What have the Lib Dems got to lose?

    Nothing. Not much to gain either - they are, and will be for the foreseeable future, an irrelevant joke.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Oppenheimer again. Murphy this time 👎

    Then again there were no stand out films in 2023.
    This bit is so… yuk

    https://x.com/filmwithyas/status/1744174184236777839?s=20
    Another one for dull as dishwater Oppenheimer, music this time. I didn’t even notice the music, just 4 hours of talking. 👎

    I’m not enjoying this, maybe I should put something else on.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494
    rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494
    rcs1000 said:

    https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/lauren-boebert-silt-incident-active-investigation-police-jayson-boebert/

    Ms Boebert is following the Ed Davey strategy: so long as they're talking about me...

    She is a bit of an anti hero though not outright villain, becuase she’s so kick ass?
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494

    rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555

    rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
    Barbie got bums on seats in cinemas - regardless of the merits of the movie, it stopped the rot in cinema-going. So it was always going to be looked upon kindly.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494
    I’d better say something on topic.
    I think Ed Davey is quite good, he comes across as a senior politician. I have no problem with him, or his leading Lib Dem’s into election. He’s hardly been an electoral liability in recent years! Beware grass seeming greener on other side, political credibility quickly lost chopping and changing leaders.
    seems to be just The Times trying to make out it’s only Lib Dem’s 100% responsible for the PO scandal - but it’s the Tories who have dominated politics for 14 years, so the heats coming for them too, for sure, which makes tomorrows Metro front page start of the problem for Rishi. Great Expectations now Rishi and his government are going to make all this good very quickly, or start to own it.
  • MoonRabbitMoonRabbit Posts: 13,494

    rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
    Barbie got bums on seats in cinemas - regardless of the merits of the movie, it stopped the rot in cinema-going. So it was always going to be looked upon kindly.
    No Marky - nobody actually likes the Barbie Movie, regardless if they felt oddly compelled to check what the fuss is all about. Film industry Gongs should give a recognition to Art, not marketing.
  • swing_voterswing_voter Posts: 1,464

    I’d better say something on topic.
    I think Ed Davey is quite good, he comes across as a senior politician. I have no problem with him, or his leading Lib Dem’s into election. He’s hardly been an electoral liability in recent years! Beware grass seeming greener on other side, political credibility quickly lost chopping and changing leaders.
    seems to be just The Times trying to make out it’s only Lib Dem’s 100% responsible for the PO scandal - but it’s the Tories who have dominated politics for 14 years, so the heats coming for them too, for sure, which makes tomorrows Metro front page start of the problem for Rishi. Great Expectations now Rishi and his government are going to make all this good very quickly, or start to own it.

    3.7million votes (or 11.5%) of those who voted wasnt a bad shout for the Lib Dems after 2015 & 2017, the trouble is they are hampered by the SNPs rise in Parliament. Davey should weather the PO storm as after all it dates back to New Labour (late 1990s) - a plague on all politicians I sense which will prob hurt the Blues the most.

    Lib Dems desperately need airtime and even BBC QT doesnt really give them a voice (not that its that important)....
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    Do the LibDems actually need airtime in this cycle? Isn't it enough to be not the Tories and Winning Here in their target seats?
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,129

    rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
    Barbie got bums on seats in cinemas - regardless of the merits of the movie, it stopped the rot in cinema-going. So it was always going to be looked upon kindly.
    No Marky - nobody actually likes the Barbie Movie, regardless if they felt oddly compelled to check what the fuss is all about. Film industry Gongs should give a recognition to Art, not marketing.
    What do you think caused the mass lying to review sites? Why couldn't people just admit they hated the movie?
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,867
    Andy_JS said:

    There was this Panorama programme in 2015 but didn't get as much attention as it might have done.

    "Trouble at Post Office - Panorama - 17th August 2015"

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3by7G0VQ3A

    https://genome.ch.bbc.co.uk/p02z27ft

    Another question about the Post Office scandal is whether there is a single MP, Minister or senior Civil Servant who does not read Private Eye? Or newspaper editor, come to that.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,867

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    A pedant writes: breakfast not dinner.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,407
    isam said:

    “NEARLY 4,000 asylum seekers have been caught pretending to be children to get into Britain — some at least 30 years old.

    About 45 per cent of the 8,766 “kids” checked by border officials since the start of 2020 turned out to be adults.”

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25273358/migrants-pretending-kids-britain/

    Now, there's a surprise.
  • rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
    Barbie got bums on seats in cinemas - regardless of the merits of the movie, it stopped the rot in cinema-going. So it was always going to be looked upon kindly.
    No Marky - nobody actually likes the Barbie Movie, regardless if they felt oddly compelled to check what the fuss is all about. Film industry Gongs should give a recognition to Art, not marketing.
    Firstly, it's a very entertaining film so that's rather unfair.

    Secondly, why should film industry gongs be a recognition of "art" any more than the plumbing industry awards you mention represent great plumbing for the ages? They are industry awards and are inevitably a reflection of sentiment in the industry at the time. The great movies achieve their recognition through longevity. My favourite example is the 1994 Oscar for best picture - the year of Shawshank Redemption and Pulp Fiction - went to Forrest Gump.
  • Do the LibDems actually need airtime in this cycle? Isn't it enough to be not the Tories and Winning Here in their target seats?

    To some extent they do. People in target seats have TVs. The squeeze message is simply an easier sell if there is some degree of visibility, lending some credibility.

    I do tend to agree with El Capitano, though. I'm far from convinced by Daisy Cooper's appeal and, in practice, I don't think it's at all likely either.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,553
    edited January 8
    Off-topic:

    First launch of ULA's new Vulcan rocket should hopefully happen in the next hour or so:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtPoAUuYXHo

    And the official stream:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZ6KTFMHenA

    The rocket is carrying a small lunar lander:
    https://www.astrobotic.com/lunar-delivery/landers/peregrine-lander/
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,620
    Careful Mike, you’ll be accused of smearing the Lib Dems.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,620
    Thoughts and prayers for me.

    My first day back at work in nearly three weeks.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,620

    On topic: I couldn’t disagree more. Daisy Cooper is Jo Swinson mk2. She comes across as hectoring and cold on TV. Installing her as leader is a strategy for the LibDems to sink to 5%, not rise to 15%.

    I’m not a great Davey fan and would have preferred Layla Moran as leader. But he’s done ok and I don’t see the PO angle getting much traction outside the right-wing broadsheets. He has a hinterland and he comes across well. His strategy is boring and unimaginative but seems to be working.

    Daisy Cooper read law and has a masters in law, she would be awesome.

    That said there would be some confusion between Daisy Cooper and Daisy May Cooper.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,553

    Thoughts and prayers for me.

    My first day back at work in nearly three weeks.

    Work? What's that? ;)
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,627
    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
    Barbie got bums on seats in cinemas - regardless of the merits of the movie, it stopped the rot in cinema-going. So it was always going to be looked upon kindly.
    No Marky - nobody actually likes the Barbie Movie, regardless if they felt oddly compelled to check what the fuss is all about. Film industry Gongs should give a recognition to Art, not marketing.
    What do you think caused the mass lying to review sites? Why couldn't people just admit they hated the movie?
    I rated Barbie 4.5 on Letterboxd, the overall mean score is 3.9.

    My ★★★★½ review of Barbie on Letterboxd https://boxd.it/4J8OqB

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,620
    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
    Barbie got bums on seats in cinemas - regardless of the merits of the movie, it stopped the rot in cinema-going. So it was always going to be looked upon kindly.
    No Marky - nobody actually likes the Barbie Movie, regardless if they felt oddly compelled to check what the fuss is all about. Film industry Gongs should give a recognition to Art, not marketing.
    What do you think caused the mass lying to review sites? Why couldn't people just admit they hated the movie?
    I rated Barbie 4.5 on Letterboxd, the overall mean score is 3.9.

    My ★★★★½ review of Barbie on Letterboxd https://boxd.it/4J8OqB

    I loved both Barbie and Oppenheimer as you can tell by my profile pic since July when I did the Barbenheimer double bill.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,627
    I think Davey can probably survive if he can last the week, but he does need to be visible and do the interviews, not hide in a fridge and look frit.

    Daisy Cooper is likely next leader of the LD, but a bit more experience would do her no harm. Not a disaster if she steps up early, while Davey takes a lower profile role.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,620

    Thoughts and prayers for me.

    My first day back at work in nearly three weeks.

    Work? What's that? ;)
    It’s what society does to take advantage of proles like me.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,627

    isam said:

    “NEARLY 4,000 asylum seekers have been caught pretending to be children to get into Britain — some at least 30 years old.

    About 45 per cent of the 8,766 “kids” checked by border officials since the start of 2020 turned out to be adults.”

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25273358/migrants-pretending-kids-britain/

    The assumption here is that if you say you're a child but the Home Office classify you as an adult you were "caught" and you're actually an adult. The charities that are working with them say that the Home Office is routinely classifying people who are actually children as adults.

    In 2022, at GMIAU we have seen an increase in the number of children being referred to us
    because the Home Office have placed them in adult accommodation having wrongly
    deemed them to be adults. Of the 15 referrals we received by June this year, 11 had their age
    wrongly changed by the Home Office to make them an adult. Over half of these children
    have now had their age accepted by their local authority and 4 of the remaining 5 continue
    to wait for an outcome. Nationwide, figures from 64 local authorities collected by the Helen
    Bamber Foundation show that in January to March 2022, 211 young people were referred to
    children’s services after having been sent to adult accommodation or detention. Two thirds
    were found to actually be children - 150 children had been placed in adult accommodation
    or detention in only three months.

    https://gmiau.org/age-assessments-2209/
    Considering the record at the Home Office at getting things wrong, this story doesn't surprise me at all.

  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,747
    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,553
    ULA are frigging awesome!

    Successful launch so far! Quite unusual for a maiden launch to be successful.

    And well done to Blue Origin with their BE-4 engines, which power the first stage.

    I think this is only the second methane-powered rocket to reach orbit.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,553
    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
  • rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
    Barbie got bums on seats in cinemas - regardless of the merits of the movie, it stopped the rot in cinema-going. So it was always going to be looked upon kindly.
    No Marky - nobody actually likes the Barbie Movie, regardless if they felt oddly compelled to check what the fuss is all about. Film industry Gongs should give a recognition to Art, not marketing.
    Wrong, my children liked the Barbie movie and therefore I did too.

    It was an entertaining kids movie, with funny bits for the adults too. What's not to like?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,620

    rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
    Barbie got bums on seats in cinemas - regardless of the merits of the movie, it stopped the rot in cinema-going. So it was always going to be looked upon kindly.
    No Marky - nobody actually likes the Barbie Movie, regardless if they felt oddly compelled to check what the fuss is all about. Film industry Gongs should give a recognition to Art, not marketing.
    Wrong, my children liked the Barbie movie and therefore I did too.

    It was an entertaining kids movie, with funny bits for the adults too. What's not to like?
    The 2001 homage at the start was genius.
  • rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
    Barbie got bums on seats in cinemas - regardless of the merits of the movie, it stopped the rot in cinema-going. So it was always going to be looked upon kindly.
    No Marky - nobody actually likes the Barbie Movie, regardless if they felt oddly compelled to check what the fuss is all about. Film industry Gongs should give a recognition to Art, not marketing.
    Wrong, my children liked the Barbie movie and therefore I did too.

    It was an entertaining kids movie, with funny bits for the adults too. What's not to like?
    The 2001 homage at the start was genius.
    It was, but I'd have thought the Ken beach scene would have been more your style.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,627
    edited January 8

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    7 ministers prior to Davey (all therefore Labour) apparently refused to meet with Bates too.

    Media frenzy needs to pick a villain though, and they have picked on Davey. These things are often not fair.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,867

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    I'd want to see the polling on that, rather than wishful thinking. The other question is whether Rishi can pull it out of the fire by announcing pardons and compensation in the next couple of days.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,620
    edited January 8

    rcs1000 said:

    These Golden Globes are a dogs dinner. The host had the tone all wrong.

    Liking Anatomy of a Fall and Beef being recognised. 👍🏻👍🏻
    Disliking Oppenheimer getting a round one for Direction. 👎
    I’m not much a fan of Bear or Crown either 👎👎

    Havn’t seen Poor Things so can’t comment on that one, but it’s supposed to be bonkers and surprising. Don’t like Emma Stone at all but at least she beat the drivel that was Barbie
    Are you Ben Shapiro?
    Clearly not as I had to Google who he is.

    “The conservative commentator set fire to two Barbie dolls in a scathing 43-minute video review of the film.”

    It’s not that it tried to turn woke into an art form, though it did, it’s that it doesn’t make sense and is not even entertaining.

    How can you live over there, the USA is nuts.
    Ugh. Gongs for Barbie.
    This charade is nothing more than a Master Plumber annual dinner, handing out gongs for any old pump installation. What an utter waste of time.
    Barbie got bums on seats in cinemas - regardless of the merits of the movie, it stopped the rot in cinema-going. So it was always going to be looked upon kindly.
    No Marky - nobody actually likes the Barbie Movie, regardless if they felt oddly compelled to check what the fuss is all about. Film industry Gongs should give a recognition to Art, not marketing.
    Wrong, my children liked the Barbie movie and therefore I did too.

    It was an entertaining kids movie, with funny bits for the adults too. What's not to like?
    The 2001 homage at the start was genius.
    It was, but I'd have thought the Ken beach scene would have been more your style.
    It was but the highlight of the film was Dame Helen Mirren's narration.

    “Note to the filmmakers: Margot Robbie is the wrong person to cast if you want to make this point.”

    After Barbie had said “I’m not pretty anymore. I’m not ‘stereotypical Barbie’ pretty.”
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,867

    ULA are frigging awesome!

    Successful launch so far! Quite unusual for a maiden launch to be successful.

    And well done to Blue Origin with their BE-4 engines, which power the first stage.

    I think this is only the second methane-powered rocket to reach orbit.

    ... to the moon and beyond.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    ...

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    Point of order. It started under the Major Government (the fiasco, not the prosecutions). That said the Conservatives come out of this with relatively clean hands.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,553

    ...

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    Point of order. It started under the Major Government (the fiasco, not the prosecutions). That said the Conservatives come out of this with relatively clean hands.
    Did it? I thought the system came in after 1999? Might well be wrong, but I remember first reading/talking with colleagues about the problems in about 2004 or 5. The first prosecutions were well into New Labour's time ISTR.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,553

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    I'd want to see the polling on that, rather than wishful thinking. The other question is whether Rishi can pull it out of the fire by announcing pardons and compensation in the next couple of days.
    Why is it 'wishful thinking'? I hope you're not claiming that Labour comes out of this mess looking good?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,798
    The Jo Swinson experience was not a happy one for the Lib Dems and it seems counter-intuitive that they want to repeat it. Having said that Ed Davey has been terrible, virtually invisible and adding nothing to the nation's story.

    What are the Lib Dems for and what do they want? Presumably not another penny on NI or whatever to "pay" for education again. There should be a good opportunity for them in this election with many Tories deeply scunnered of their party and yet underwhelmed by Starmer. They seem at serious risk of not taking it by having so little to say.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,044
    Foxy said:

    I think Davey can probably survive if he can last the week, but he does need to be visible and do the interviews, not hide in a fridge and look frit.

    Daisy Cooper is likely next leader of the LD, but a bit more experience would do her no harm. Not a disaster if she steps up early, while Davey takes a lower profile role.

    OGH describes her as “ambitious”, but the notable thing about Cooper is that she did NOT stand in the previous leadership election, despite many urging her too. She deliberately went for the deputy role to get experience.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,798

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    I'd want to see the polling on that, rather than wishful thinking. The other question is whether Rishi can pull it out of the fire by announcing pardons and compensation in the next couple of days.
    It’s great that the government is talking about doing something. It’s ridiculous that they didn’t react until the scandal was made into an ITV drama.
    Especially when the somewhat belated inquiry has been generating appalling headlines for nearly 2 months exposing incompetence, dishonesty and stupidity in roughly equal measures. The way that the current board has mucked about with late and belated production of documents is a disgrace and should have some of them up for contempt.

    But better late than never, I suppose.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,867

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    I'd want to see the polling on that, rather than wishful thinking. The other question is whether Rishi can pull it out of the fire by announcing pardons and compensation in the next couple of days.
    Why is it 'wishful thinking'? I hope you're not claiming that Labour comes out of this mess looking good?
    I'm saying I'd want to see evidence that voters' collective view of Labour is affected one way or the other. You will also note I suggest there is time for the Conservative government to come out of this smelling of roses. You cannot complain of partisanship by ignoring half of what I wrote.
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,806
    DavidL said:

    The Jo Swinson experience was not a happy one for the Lib Dems and it seems counter-intuitive that they want to repeat it. Having said that Ed Davey has been terrible, virtually invisible and adding nothing to the nation's story.

    What are the Lib Dems for and what do they want? Presumably not another penny on NI or whatever to "pay" for education again. There should be a good opportunity for them in this election with many Tories deeply scunnered of their party and yet underwhelmed by Starmer. They seem at serious risk of not taking it by having so little to say.

    Anyone who had ever actually listened to Jo Swinson - whether on QT, Today, in Parlt or whatever - could have foreseen that she wasn’t ready for the job. Her election was a classic example of media projecting what it wanted onto the role. I think Cooper might be better, she has a no nonsenseness about her that might play well in the blue wall, but would have little recognition outside we obsessives.

    The LibDems just need to pitch pragmatism and internationalism. That’s where their votes are.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,986
    ...
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    edited January 8

    ...

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    Point of order. It started under the Major Government (the fiasco, not the prosecutions). That said the Conservatives come out of this with relatively clean hands.
    Did it? I thought the system came in after 1999? Might well be wrong, but I remember first reading/talking with colleagues about the problems in about 2004 or 5. The first prosecutions were well into New Labour's time ISTR.
    The system was procured in 1996. The Horizon system was due to be operated by Government Departments as well as the Post Office. It was dropped as I recall by the Government but not the Post Office due to issues arising.

    This shouldn't be a Party political issue but I can't disagree with your implication that New Labour and later the LibDems are guilty of the most egregious miscarriage of justice the nation has ever seen.
  • ChrisChris Posts: 11,747

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    But my point was that regardless of who looks bad or good in relation to their actions over the Post Office, the bare fact that people are reminded about the Lib Dems having been in the Coalition is bad for them.
  • MonksfieldMonksfield Posts: 2,806
    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    But my point was that regardless of who looks bad or good in relation to their actions over the Post Office, the bare fact that people are reminded about the Lib Dems having been in the Coalition is bad for them.
    Not necessarily. In hindsight the coalition era looks like a golden age compared to the 8 year shitshow that has followed.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061
    Foxy said:

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    7 ministers prior to Davey (all therefore Labour) apparently refused to meet with Bates too.

    Media frenzy needs to pick a villain though, and they have picked on Davey. These things are often not fair.
    Fair (ironically, given the issue) doesn't come in to it.
    One could argue that Ken Clarke was significantly more responsible for failing to act over the contaminated blood scandal - which destroyed even more lives. And despite that he is quite reasonably regarded as one if the better ministers of the last half century.

    Davey was almost certainly misled by the PO and let down by civil servants.
    Nonetheless, he was the responsible minister who missed a chance to halt a miscarriage of justice. I don't think there's any upside to his toughing this out - and if he acts promptly, significant benefit in stepping down, as a matter of both principle and pragmatism.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    Meanwhile, if there's any truth in it, the biggest political news may be this:

    Jeremy Corbyn has been tipped to decide in just “weeks” whether to launch a new political movement to rival Keir Starmer’s Labour Party.

    According to friends of the former Labour leader, Corbyn could launch a new party which could take voters dissatisfied with the current Labour Party away from Starmer.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,044

    ...

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    Point of order. It started under the Major Government (the fiasco, not the prosecutions). That said the Conservatives come out of this with relatively clean hands.
    Did it? I thought the system came in after 1999? Might well be wrong, but I remember first reading/talking with colleagues about the problems in about 2004 or 5. The first prosecutions were well into New Labour's time ISTR.
    The Horizon system was piloted in 1995 and the same problems were already apparent during the pilot. The full introduction started 1999.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555

    On topic: I couldn’t disagree more. Daisy Cooper is Jo Swinson mk2. She comes across as hectoring and cold on TV. Installing her as leader is a strategy for the LibDems to sink to 5%, not rise to 15%.

    I’m not a great Davey fan and would have preferred Layla Moran as leader. But he’s done ok and I don’t see the PO angle getting much traction outside the right-wing broadsheets. He has a hinterland and he comes across well. His strategy is boring and unimaginative but seems to be working.

    Daisy Cooper read law and has a masters in law, she would be awesome.

    That said there would be some confusion between Daisy Cooper and Daisy May Cooper.
    We survived the confusion of Theresa May and Teresa May....
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,798

    DavidL said:

    The Jo Swinson experience was not a happy one for the Lib Dems and it seems counter-intuitive that they want to repeat it. Having said that Ed Davey has been terrible, virtually invisible and adding nothing to the nation's story.

    What are the Lib Dems for and what do they want? Presumably not another penny on NI or whatever to "pay" for education again. There should be a good opportunity for them in this election with many Tories deeply scunnered of their party and yet underwhelmed by Starmer. They seem at serious risk of not taking it by having so little to say.

    Anyone who had ever actually listened to Jo Swinson - whether on QT, Today, in Parlt or whatever - could have foreseen that she wasn’t ready for the job. Her election was a classic example of media projecting what it wanted onto the role. I think Cooper might be better, she has a no nonsenseness about her that might play well in the blue wall, but would have little recognition outside we obsessives.

    The LibDems just need to pitch pragmatism and internationalism. That’s where their votes are.
    I think that they need a story. Back at the time of the GFC wise old uncle Vince was going around giving banal commentary on every program and radio station almost daily. Back in the days of Nick Clegg they had the "I agree with Nick" debate and a much higher profile in Parliament largely built on the back of Kennedy's wise opposition to the Iraq war.

    Education used to be their thing and there is a lot to be said about it (ask @ydoethur ) but I have no idea what they are proposing. What do they have to say about our relations with the EU? Its not as if Labour is filling up the bandwidth on policy.

    As a minor party they don't need lots of policies but they need a major topic where they seem to have something different to say. Davey has not provided that. Nor has anyone else in the party.
  • FlannerFlanner Posts: 437

    ...

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    Point of order. It started under the Major Government (the fiasco, not the prosecutions). That said the Conservatives come out of this with relatively clean hands.
    Did it? I thought the system came in after 1999? Might well be wrong, but I remember first reading/talking with colleagues about the problems in about 2004 or 5. The first prosecutions were well into New Labour's time ISTR.
    The system was procured in 1996. The Horizon system was due to be operated by Government Departments as well as the Post Office. It was dropped as I recall by the Government but not the Post Office due to issues arising.

    This shouldn't be a Party political issue but I can't disagree with your implication that New Labour and later the LibDems are guilty of the most egregious miscarriage of justice the nation has ever seen.
    There's a hearsay report in the Guardian that a Labour MP claimed in the Commons in December 2023 that the first prosecutions under the Major-era Horizon trial (1995) took place while John Major was still PM

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2024/jan/07/post-office-suspected-of-more-wrongful-prosecutions-of-operators-over-horizon#:~:text=The Post Office is suspected,the Guardian has been told.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,553

    ...

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    Point of order. It started under the Major Government (the fiasco, not the prosecutions). That said the Conservatives come out of this with relatively clean hands.
    Did it? I thought the system came in after 1999? Might well be wrong, but I remember first reading/talking with colleagues about the problems in about 2004 or 5. The first prosecutions were well into New Labour's time ISTR.
    The Horizon system was piloted in 1995 and the same problems were already apparent during the pilot. The full introduction started 1999.
    Yes, but the issues with prosecutions came well into New Labour's time. It seems a little odd to try to pin this debacle on Major's government.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061
    .

    ...

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    Point of order. It started under the Major Government (the fiasco, not the prosecutions). That said the Conservatives come out of this with relatively clean hands.
    Did it? I thought the system came in after 1999? Might well be wrong, but I remember first reading/talking with colleagues about the problems in about 2004 or 5. The first prosecutions were well into New Labour's time ISTR.
    It's been recently reported that (likely wrongful) prosecutions took place during Major's government thanks to a pre-Horizon pilot scheme, which seems to have resulted in similar problems.
  • TimSTimS Posts: 12,984

    DavidL said:

    The Jo Swinson experience was not a happy one for the Lib Dems and it seems counter-intuitive that they want to repeat it. Having said that Ed Davey has been terrible, virtually invisible and adding nothing to the nation's story.

    What are the Lib Dems for and what do they want? Presumably not another penny on NI or whatever to "pay" for education again. There should be a good opportunity for them in this election with many Tories deeply scunnered of their party and yet underwhelmed by Starmer. They seem at serious risk of not taking it by having so little to say.

    Anyone who had ever actually listened to Jo Swinson - whether on QT, Today, in Parlt or whatever - could have foreseen that she wasn’t ready for the job. Her election was a classic example of media projecting what it wanted onto the role. I think Cooper might be better, she has a no nonsenseness about her that might play well in the blue wall, but would have little recognition outside we obsessives.

    The LibDems just need to pitch pragmatism and internationalism. That’s where their votes are.
    The Lib Dems will have an important role during the next Labour administration once, as I expect, Labour start getting all authoritarian. For now they are there to give the Tories a kicking in constituencies where Labour aren’t competitive.

    I don’t see the knives out for Davey on social media and in coverage of the PO scandal, certainly not yet. The Davey angle seems to be for the moment much more salient on here than elsewhere. That can of course change rapidly.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,555
    IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, if there's any truth in it, the biggest political news may be this:

    Jeremy Corbyn has been tipped to decide in just “weeks” whether to launch a new political movement to rival Keir Starmer’s Labour Party.

    According to friends of the former Labour leader, Corbyn could launch a new party which could take voters dissatisfied with the current Labour Party away from Starmer.

    Will it give free OWLs?
  • IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, if there's any truth in it, the biggest political news may be this:

    Jeremy Corbyn has been tipped to decide in just “weeks” whether to launch a new political movement to rival Keir Starmer’s Labour Party.

    According to friends of the former Labour leader, Corbyn could launch a new party which could take voters dissatisfied with the current Labour Party away from Starmer.

    I think that would broadly assist Starmer by making the break from the Corbyn era all the clearer. Beyond Islington North, they aren't likely to harvest many votes, as the brand is so reliant on the weird personality cult around Corbyn himself. But it'd make Labour less scary for ex-Tories.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,044
    Nigelb said:

    Foxy said:

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    7 ministers prior to Davey (all therefore Labour) apparently refused to meet with Bates too.

    Media frenzy needs to pick a villain though, and they have picked on Davey. These things are often not fair.
    Fair (ironically, given the issue) doesn't come in to it.
    One could argue that Ken Clarke was significantly more responsible for failing to act over the contaminated blood scandal - which destroyed even more lives. And despite that he is quite reasonably regarded as one if the better ministers of the last half century.

    Davey was almost certainly misled by the PO and let down by civil servants.
    Nonetheless, he was the responsible minister who missed a chance to halt a miscarriage of justice. I don't think there's any upside to his toughing this out - and if he acts promptly, significant benefit in stepping down, as a matter of both principle and pragmatism.
    I think it’s more likely that Davey’s (relatively minor) role in the affair will have been entirely forgotten by the general election. PB always overestimates the probabilities of people needing to resign over things.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,798
    IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, if there's any truth in it, the biggest political news may be this:

    Jeremy Corbyn has been tipped to decide in just “weeks” whether to launch a new political movement to rival Keir Starmer’s Labour Party.

    According to friends of the former Labour leader, Corbyn could launch a new party which could take voters dissatisfied with the current Labour Party away from Starmer.

    It was the threat of this that resulted in the likes of Blair not getting rid decades ago. Whether that threat actually amounts to anything will be interesting to see. There is an argument that having opposition to the left would allow the amorphous blob that is SKS to get some real definition at last.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    The worst of it, though, is the last decade during which it's been blatantly obvious that it was a massive miscarriage of justice. And how little government has done to address that during that time.

    If it ought to have been obvious to Davey back in 2010, how much more so should it have been to succeeding ministers ?
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859

    On topic: I couldn’t disagree more. Daisy Cooper is Jo Swinson mk2. She comes across as hectoring and cold on TV. Installing her as leader is a strategy for the LibDems to sink to 5%, not rise to 15%.

    I’m not a great Davey fan and would have preferred Layla Moran as leader. But he’s done ok and I don’t see the PO angle getting much traction outside the right-wing broadsheets. He has a hinterland and he comes across well. His strategy is boring and unimaginative but seems to be working.

    Cooper's personaility is more engaging than Swinson's, but I agree she's still a risk. Although ambitious, the shortness of her Wikipedia article is an illlustration that she's very new on the stage. And the argument that a bright young woman will allow the LibDems to stand out from the middle aged men was tested and flopped the last time around.

    The target audience next time are educated Home Counties home owners who mostly follow the news and who are shocked and worried at the poundshop populist party the New Tories have become under the malign influence of the lying clown. Steady Eddie will do just fine.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368

    IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, if there's any truth in it, the biggest political news may be this:

    Jeremy Corbyn has been tipped to decide in just “weeks” whether to launch a new political movement to rival Keir Starmer’s Labour Party.

    According to friends of the former Labour leader, Corbyn could launch a new party which could take voters dissatisfied with the current Labour Party away from Starmer.

    Will it give free OWLs?
    No but it gives your team another five years of inch-perfect government. Rishi is indeed a lucky General.

    The vanity of Jeremy Corbyn. Worth 3 quid to every Conservative Party member.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,553
    Nigelb said:

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    The worst of it, though, is the last decade during which it's been blatantly obvious that it was a massive miscarriage of justice. And how little government has done to address that during that time.

    If it ought to have been obvious to Davey back in 2010, how much more so should it have been to succeeding ministers ?
    Absolutely agree. Prosecutions continued until 2015, which was far too late.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The Jo Swinson experience was not a happy one for the Lib Dems and it seems counter-intuitive that they want to repeat it. Having said that Ed Davey has been terrible, virtually invisible and adding nothing to the nation's story.

    What are the Lib Dems for and what do they want? Presumably not another penny on NI or whatever to "pay" for education again. There should be a good opportunity for them in this election with many Tories deeply scunnered of their party and yet underwhelmed by Starmer. They seem at serious risk of not taking it by having so little to say.

    Anyone who had ever actually listened to Jo Swinson - whether on QT, Today, in Parlt or whatever - could have foreseen that she wasn’t ready for the job. Her election was a classic example of media projecting what it wanted onto the role. I think Cooper might be better, she has a no nonsenseness about her that might play well in the blue wall, but would have little recognition outside we obsessives.

    The LibDems just need to pitch pragmatism and internationalism. That’s where their votes are.
    I think that they need a story. Back at the time of the GFC wise old uncle Vince was going around giving banal commentary on every program and radio station almost daily. Back in the days of Nick Clegg they had the "I agree with Nick" debate and a much higher profile in Parliament largely built on the back of Kennedy's wise opposition to the Iraq war.

    Education used to be their thing and there is a lot to be said about it (ask @ydoethur ) but I have no idea what they are proposing. What do they have to say about our relations with the EU? Its not as if Labour is filling up the bandwidth on policy.

    As a minor party they don't need lots of policies but they need a major topic where they seem to have something different to say. Davey has not provided that. Nor has anyone else in the party.
    How much of that is simply down to the amount of airtime they were allocated then, as opposed to now ?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,553
    edited January 8
    This is an interesting snippet:

    "As the negotiations with ICL Pathway dragged on into the spring of 1999, further pressure was brought to bear on the UK Government by Fujitsu. Tadashi Sekizawa, chairman of Fujitsu, wrote to the Prime Minister in a without prejudice letter of 7 April 1999, claiming that Fujitsu would be required to make a provision in its accounts of approximately £300 million, unless a legally binding agreement for the future of Horizon was in place by 23 April 1999.

    Mr Sekizawa warned the Prime Minister that neither ICL nor Fujitsu would be prepared to make any further investment in the development of the Horizon System if Fujitsu were obliged to make such a provision in its accounts, and expressed a hope that a resolution of the commercial negotiations could be reached. (Snip)

    Mr Sekizawa's letter was followed by a meeting between the Prime Minister himself and Mr Michio Naruto, as I've said, the then Vice-Chairman of Fujitsu and chairman of ICL Plc, on 12 April 1999, in which a discussion took place relating to the future of the Horizon project, so within five days of the receipt of the Fujitsu letter. (Snip)

    https://www.postofficehorizoninquiry.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-10/POH 11 October 2022.pdf

    Some interesting stuff afterwards about the government's priorities...
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859

    ...

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    Point of order. It started under the Major Government (the fiasco, not the prosecutions). That said the Conservatives come out of this with relatively clean hands.
    Did it? I thought the system came in after 1999? Might well be wrong, but I remember first reading/talking with colleagues about the problems in about 2004 or 5. The first prosecutions were well into New Labour's time ISTR.
    The system was commissioned as one of the early big PFI projects under Major's government. Initially the Benefits Agency was part of the partnership (not that they all got on that well), intending to replace the benefits giro with a benefits smart card that claimants would have to use in the Post Office. Through a mix of frustration with the early system development, delays and cost overruns, and a growing realisation as New Labour took over that the benefits card was a blind alley in that soon everyone would have a bank account and be doing online banking, the Benefits Agency pulled out. Darling and Byers and Blair have already given their evidence to the inquiry.

    This contributed to the story to the extent that the PO and Fujitsu limped on with a system originally configured for and designed around the benefits smart card project that was no more; IT experts suggest this is a reason why the system was over-engineered (in ways I don't really understand, except conceptually).
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    Foxy said:

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    7 ministers prior to Davey (all therefore Labour) apparently refused to meet with Bates too.

    There's not even a "too", since he was the only one of a very long three-party sequence who actually did so.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061
    TimS said:

    DavidL said:

    The Jo Swinson experience was not a happy one for the Lib Dems and it seems counter-intuitive that they want to repeat it. Having said that Ed Davey has been terrible, virtually invisible and adding nothing to the nation's story.

    What are the Lib Dems for and what do they want? Presumably not another penny on NI or whatever to "pay" for education again. There should be a good opportunity for them in this election with many Tories deeply scunnered of their party and yet underwhelmed by Starmer. They seem at serious risk of not taking it by having so little to say.

    Anyone who had ever actually listened to Jo Swinson - whether on QT, Today, in Parlt or whatever - could have foreseen that she wasn’t ready for the job. Her election was a classic example of media projecting what it wanted onto the role. I think Cooper might be better, she has a no nonsenseness about her that might play well in the blue wall, but would have little recognition outside we obsessives.

    The LibDems just need to pitch pragmatism and internationalism. That’s where their votes are.
    The Lib Dems will have an important role during the next Labour administration once, as I expect, Labour start getting all authoritarian. For now they are there to give the Tories a kicking in constituencies where Labour aren’t competitive.

    I don’t see the knives out for Davey on social media and in coverage of the PO scandal, certainly not yet. The Davey angle seems to be for the moment much more salient on here than elsewhere. That can of course change rapidly.
    The media are certainly having a crack - both the Times and Sun have editorials attacking him.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,522

    Do the LibDems actually need airtime in this cycle? Isn't it enough to be not the Tories and Winning Here in their target seats?

    Yes, the blandness of Labour under current management facilitates tactical voting both ways. Although there are significant policy differences in detail (e.g. in new housing vs NIMBYism), both parties are primarily seen as being unthreatening non-Tories with few USPs to polarise sentiment either way.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,214

    IanB2 said:

    Meanwhile, if there's any truth in it, the biggest political news may be this:

    Jeremy Corbyn has been tipped to decide in just “weeks” whether to launch a new political movement to rival Keir Starmer’s Labour Party.

    According to friends of the former Labour leader, Corbyn could launch a new party which could take voters dissatisfied with the current Labour Party away from Starmer.

    Will it give free OWLs?
    No but it gives your team another five years of inch-perfect government. Rishi is indeed a lucky General.

    The vanity of Jeremy Corbyn. Worth 3 quid to every Conservative Party member.
    How many votes would a Jez Party take from Labour and where? My guess is not many and where it doesn't matter.

    After all, the Greens already function as a recycling bin for votes of disgruntled lefties.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,401

    Do the LibDems actually need airtime in this cycle? Isn't it enough to be not the Tories and Winning Here in their target seats?

    Yes, the blandness of Labour under current management facilitates tactical voting both ways. Although there are significant policy differences in detail (e.g. in new housing vs NIMBYism), both parties are primarily seen as being unthreatening non-Tories with few USPs to polarise sentiment either way.
    we need Jezza back
  • No_Offence_AlanNo_Offence_Alan Posts: 4,513

    On topic: I couldn’t disagree more. Daisy Cooper is Jo Swinson mk2. She comes across as hectoring and cold on TV. Installing her as leader is a strategy for the LibDems to sink to 5%, not rise to 15%.

    I’m not a great Davey fan and would have preferred Layla Moran as leader. But he’s done ok and I don’t see the PO angle getting much traction outside the right-wing broadsheets. He has a hinterland and he comes across well. His strategy is boring and unimaginative but seems to be working.

    Daisy Cooper read law and has a masters in law, she would be awesome.

    That said there would be some confusion between Daisy Cooper and Daisy May Cooper.
    Like there was between Teresa May and Theresa May ?
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061

    Do the LibDems actually need airtime in this cycle? Isn't it enough to be not the Tories and Winning Here in their target seats?

    Yes, the blandness of Labour under current management facilitates tactical voting both ways. Although there are significant policy differences in detail (e.g. in new housing vs NIMBYism), both parties are primarily seen as being unthreatening non-Tories with few USPs to polarise sentiment either way.
    we need Jezza back
    Yes, that's probably the Tories' best hope.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    edited January 8

    ...

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    Point of order. It started under the Major Government (the fiasco, not the prosecutions). That said the Conservatives come out of this with relatively clean hands.
    Did it? I thought the system came in after 1999? Might well be wrong, but I remember first reading/talking with colleagues about the problems in about 2004 or 5. The first prosecutions were well into New Labour's time ISTR.
    The Horizon system was piloted in 1995 and the same problems were already apparent during the pilot. The full introduction started 1999.
    Yes, but the issues with prosecutions came well into New Labour's time. It seems a little odd to try to pin this debacle on Major's government.
    Despite Ms C majoring on the role of politicians, I think they are well down the list of potential cuplrits, certainly as far as the original problem is concerned. An industry IT system that is generating accounting errors really is something that a large company - especially one as exposed to scutiny as was the PO (being subject to public and media interest, a statutory regulator, a customer pressure group, and several powerful and active trade unions) - should have been able to sort out itself.

    As the size and scale and knowledge of the developing scandal grew, the political world becomes more and more culpable, since while we do not rely on our ministers to find out whether a company's IT system is working, we do expect politicians to campaign against injustice on behalf of their constituents. The government's silence and inactivity over more recent years and its showering the PO CEO with honour and lining her up with a job inside 10 Downing Street, after all the key points of the story were known, is by far the bigger misjudgement.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,952
    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    But my point was that regardless of who looks bad or good in relation to their actions over the Post Office, the bare fact that people are reminded about the Lib Dems having been in the Coalition is bad for them.
    It is only bad for them in the Corbynite sense of it being better to be out of power with your principles inviolate, than in government with all the messy, disappointing compromise that that entails.

    Better to be in power is the sensible view.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,401
    Nigelb said:

    Do the LibDems actually need airtime in this cycle? Isn't it enough to be not the Tories and Winning Here in their target seats?

    Yes, the blandness of Labour under current management facilitates tactical voting both ways. Although there are significant policy differences in detail (e.g. in new housing vs NIMBYism), both parties are primarily seen as being unthreatening non-Tories with few USPs to polarise sentiment either way.
    we need Jezza back
    Yes, that's probably the Tories' best hope.
    Nah the Tories best hope is a turn in the economy and personal tax cuts. But even that will not give rhem a victory.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    Foxy said:

    isam said:

    “NEARLY 4,000 asylum seekers have been caught pretending to be children to get into Britain — some at least 30 years old.

    About 45 per cent of the 8,766 “kids” checked by border officials since the start of 2020 turned out to be adults.”

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25273358/migrants-pretending-kids-britain/

    The assumption here is that if you say you're a child but the Home Office classify you as an adult you were "caught" and you're actually an adult. The charities that are working with them say that the Home Office is routinely classifying people who are actually children as adults.

    In 2022, at GMIAU we have seen an increase in the number of children being referred to us
    because the Home Office have placed them in adult accommodation having wrongly
    deemed them to be adults. Of the 15 referrals we received by June this year, 11 had their age
    wrongly changed by the Home Office to make them an adult. Over half of these children
    have now had their age accepted by their local authority and 4 of the remaining 5 continue
    to wait for an outcome. Nationwide, figures from 64 local authorities collected by the Helen
    Bamber Foundation show that in January to March 2022, 211 young people were referred to
    children’s services after having been sent to adult accommodation or detention. Two thirds
    were found to actually be children - 150 children had been placed in adult accommodation
    or detention in only three months.

    https://gmiau.org/age-assessments-2209/
    Considering the record at the Home Office at getting things wrong, this story doesn't surprise me at all.

    The exsmple they give of the child refugee being forced to live with adults and ‘terrified’ as a result
    is a bit much - Afran is a year older than Luke Littler!
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,061
    TOPPING said:

    Chris said:

    Chris said:

    Strikes me that regardless of whether Davey was at fault in his actions over the Post Office, it's bad enough that this is a reminder to people about the Coalition, which is something the Lib Dems have never properly recovered from.

    It's also a reminder about New Labour, who the mess started under.

    No organisation comes out of this looking good. Politically, Labour, the Lib Dems and the Conservatives are all sullied by it, to one extent or another.
    But my point was that regardless of who looks bad or good in relation to their actions over the Post Office, the bare fact that people are reminded about the Lib Dems having been in the Coalition is bad for them.
    It is only bad for them in the Corbynite sense of it being better to be out of power with your principles inviolate, than in government with all the messy, disappointing compromise that that entails.

    Better to be in power is the sensible view.
    Davey resigning, and the election of a new leader, would get the LibDems considerable media coverage, looking at it cynically.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,407

    Thoughts and prayers for me.

    My first day back at work in nearly three weeks.

    Likewise.

    Hard.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,068
    edited January 8
    I just had this ad on YouTube

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jhM6a-cInc

    I think it's AI. The whole thing. Including the person.
This discussion has been closed.