Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

A Dismal Spectacle – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,014
edited March 12 in General
imageA Dismal Spectacle – politicalbetting.com

35 years ago – 14 February 1989 – Khomeini’s fatwa against Salman Rushdie was issued. A foreign leader instructed members of his religion world-wide to murder him because he had written a book which that leader claimed insulted his religion. After the initial outrage, some Labour politicians started rowing back, claiming that the reaction of Muslims here who supported the fatwa was understandable. It was an unprincipled, craven stance influenced by a desire not to offend Labour voters. Threatening the life and safety of a British citizen could be justified, if there were votes in it.

Read the full story here

«13456

Comments

  • Options
    Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 594
    Second....
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,844
    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.
  • Options
    It’s Friday
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,253
    edited February 23
    Of all the aspects of this fiasco, the fact that it might suggest that threats of violence have some effect is the one that worries me the least. No-one who had made or is thinking of making such threats is going to see having a Labour amendment taken on an SNP opposition day as any kind of victory, or anything worth having, or worth trying to repeat.

    And it is noticeable, in any case, that nothing was said about this ‘security’ explanation for the Speaker’s ruling on the day; this story has emerged only after it turned into a scandal. If we do the Speaker the favour of assuming that it’s genuine, and not a convenient post hoc explanation, it is likely that Starmer put such concerns to him to try and ‘persuade’ the Speaker to make a ruling that just happened to get Starmer out of a huge political hole, security concerns or no.

    The big issue is that a combination of absurdly arcane parliamentary procedure and the appalling behaviour of members across the chamber has brought our national politics further into disrepute.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181

    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.

    MPs are forced to wear stab vests because people are threatening not to vote for them?
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 12,983

    It’s Friday

    We should all be at the mosque.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,844
    ydoethur said:

    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.

    MPs are forced to wear stab vests because people are threatening not to vote for them?
    A stab vest will be of little use under my MP Gazan swap scheme.

    Do MPs where stab vests?
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    “A Dismal Spectacle”

    Eng 112/5 at lunch on Day 1, having chosen to bat.
  • Options
    SandpitSandpit Posts: 49,859
    edited February 23

    ydoethur said:

    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.

    MPs are forced to wear stab vests because people are threatening not to vote for them?
    A stab vest will be of little use under my MP Gazan swap scheme.

    Do MPs where stab vests?
    The Jewish MPs do wear stab vests, yes.
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,013
    ydoethur said:

    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.

    MPs are forced to wear stab vests because people are threatening not to vote for them?
    Better than being hole-y-er than thou

  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,181
    edited February 23

    ydoethur said:

    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.

    MPs are forced to wear stab vests because people are threatening not to vote for them?
    A stab vest will be of little use under my MP Gazan swap scheme.

    Do MPs were stab vests?
    Yes (assuming you mean ‘wear’)

    https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-mike-freer-says-many-31749984.amp
  • Options
    StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 7,013
    Interesting that the Palestinian accusations are “credible” while she believed reports of sexual violence against Israelis on October 7 were “disinformation”
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,189
    An excellent article, thank you @Cyclefree. I have no idea if these threats against MPs are credible, but the Speaker’s decision implies that they are and we have a very serious problem in this country. There’s a lot of hyperbole from the likes of Nigel Farage on this subject, but Hoyle’s decision makes it very hard to disagree with them.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937

    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.

    "It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide."

    I call bullshit.

    Why?

    Firstly, you cannot know this. You are not a conduit through which the protestors contact MPs; so you cannot know that everyone on your side is playing nicely. You may want it to be true, but that doesn't make it true.

    Secondly, serious threats against MPs are well documented on a whole host of issues. Causes, good and bad, attract those who go a little too far - though mostly just in words, not physical violence. Though words can be bad enough for the target. So it is not as though threats of violence are unprecedented. And as we've seen with Cox and Amess, violence can occur, and MPs are right to be concerned.

    Thirdly, your fellow travellers are numerous. I *know* you wouldn't possibly threaten an MP, and neither would any of your friends, because you're all awesome. But with that number of people, there're bound to be some idiots - or worse - who go too far.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937
    In other news, it looks as though the cladding on the building was a major factor in the tragic building fire in Spain.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68374811
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 4,772
    IanB2 said:

    Of all the aspects of this fiasco, the fact that it might suggest that threats of violence have some effect is the one that worries me the least. No-one who had made or is thinking of making such threats is going to see having a Labour amendment taken on an SNP opposition day as any kind of victory, or anything worth having, or worth trying to repeat.

    And it is noticeable, in any case, that nothing was said about this ‘security’ explanation for the Speaker’s ruling on the day; this story has emerged only after it turned into a scandal. If we do the Speaker the favour of assuming that it’s genuine, and not a convenient post hoc explanation, it is likely that Starmer put such concerns to him to try and ‘persuade’ the Speaker to make a ruling that just happened to get Starmer out of a huge political hole, security concerns or no.

    The big issue is that a combination of absurdly arcane parliamentary procedure and the appalling behaviour of members across the chamber has brought our national politics further into disrepute.

    Putting pressure on the Speaker is hardly noteworthy . It happens all the time with amendments . The Tories decided to stoke the fire by withdrawing their amendment which meant the SNP motion wasn’t voted on . Then the pathetic spectacle of Mordaunt playing the martyr . No one comes out of this looking good and the SNP opposition day was only designed to cause trouble for Labour given they originally were going to debate 28 billion green funds aswell as the Gaza ceasefire. No one buys their argument , as for Starmer and Hoyle well if both deny the threats claim that’s the end of the matter .

    And even if it did happen it was apparently more likely it came from the Labour Whips so Starmer isn’t implicated anyway .
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,586
    Geoffrey Cox on Newsnight was arguing the same line as this header, that it is terrible that Parliamentary procedure has been upended by threats of violence. (He was left spluttering when Faisal Islam asked him whether what had happened was rather minor compared to his own upending of Parliamentary procedure when he illegally prorogued Parliament. Watch the video on iPlayer.)

    I do not accept this line of reasoning. The precise arrangements for minor party opposition days, where others can propose amendments but they are never called, before a non-binding vote is not some crucial part of the bedrock of our democracy. One can argue Hoyle was right or wrong to take an amendment that changed a motion calling for a ceasefire to a slightly different motion calling for a ceasefire. Threats of intimidation didn’t change how MPs voted, which would be a concern, but it’s not some craven acquiescence to terrorism for the Speaker to decide that on a contentious matter, it was important to get to a motion that a majority of the House could support rather than let the SNP play games with a motion designed purely for their own campaigning purposes.

    Looking at the newspaper headlines this morning, these events are absent or the third story. I think the newspapers appreciate that the public will be largely unbothered by this spat. It is a concern that MPs are being intimidated, but this row over Parliamentary procedure does not mean the terrorists have won.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,119
    Celebrity Terrorist has her appeal againt the revocation of her citizenship today.

    If she wins the govt may still appeal.

    If she returns celebrity big brother, I'm a sleb, strictly and Masterchef may well await. Mind you it is a big if. Even if she gets her citizenship back, and I think she should, there are several others in these camps who retain british citizenship who have not been repatriated and there is little sign of them being repatriated. An incoming labour govt will probably have a different view.

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/court-to-rule-on-shamima-begum-appeal-against-citizenship-removal/ar-BB1iKlvG?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=27ecb2d326df44f483775ee7ba1f9a7d&ei=8
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,119

    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.

    I am the publisher of this thread, there are no Islamophobic tropes in this piece.

    I have seen some of the threats made against current MPs, as I did during the Brexit impasse. The overwhelming majority of people who want peace in Gaza are non violent, there's a very small minority who are not, just like I don't tar all Brexiteers with Thomas Mair or the far right mobs who threatened to Jo Cox a few MPs.

    You owe Cyclefree an apology.
    Sadly the whole debate on Israel-Gaza is dominated by extremes. Either warmongers like the usual suspects who excuse Israels worst excesses, even ethnic cleansing, or people who think any criticism of Hamas or the pro Hamas protesters is Islamophobic.

    It is depressing. Quite frankly I expected better from here.
  • Options
    On topic, perhaps Speaker Hoyle was right to the deny the SNP amendment, given the dark heart of Scottish Nationalism.

    Yousaf urged to suspend MSP who said it was legitimate to criticise ‘the Jews’

    John Mason accused of making ‘appalling antisemitic comment’ in Gaza debate at Holyrood


    Humza Yousaf has been urged to suspend an SNP MSP who said it was legitimate to criticise “the Jews” because of the Bible’s teachings.

    In a debate at Holyrood about the war in Gaza, John Mason, who has often fallen foul of his party leadership for a series of controversial comments, said it was possible not to be antisemitic while criticising the Israeli state.

    However, he added that “neither are the two completely distinct and unconnected” because most Jewish people in the UK had relations or friends in Israel.

    “It is the only Jewish state in the world and, according to the Bible, is the land which God gave his chosen people,” Mason said.

    “Now, having said that, it does not mean that we cannot criticise the Jews or Israel. God himself is hugely critical of his people in much of the scriptures, not least when he punished them by exiling them to Babylon and elsewhere.

    “So, it is not antisemitic for some to say that the present Israeli offensive has been over the top and has possibly crossed the line from defence to revenge.”


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/yousaf-urged-to-suspend-msp-who-said-it-was-legitimate-to-criticise-the-jews-cj5nxw0ch
  • Options
    ChrisChris Posts: 11,117
    I think this kind of attack would be better published above the writer's name rather than under a pseudonym.
  • Options
    I both agree and disagree with chunks of this piece. Especially this bit:

    "Rather than stand up to this [threats of violence against MPs], he caved in." - really? What happened - Parliament passed a motion calling for a complete cease-fire. The real nutters out there want to destroy Israel and think anyone who disagrees is "enabling genocide". The motion passed fulfils the sane part of the argument and - unlike the original SNP motion - does not provide succour to the nutters.

    We also need to go back to what specifically happened. Yesterday I posted a link to and text from the letter from the clerk to the speaker. What Hoyle chose to do was in order, with precedent, and exclusively at his discretion. All of the guff about Hoyle making up the rules as he went along is just that - guff.

    What should have happened? How would MPs have "stood up" to nutters making threats? By passing the inflammatory SNP motion designed to appease them? I'm defending Holye despite the motion of my own party not even being selected - I'm not being partisan.

    There is a clear path being trod by the international community to constrain both of the aggressors and bring fighting to a stop. Our parliament passed a motion keeping us on that international path. That IS standing up to the nutters who think only Israel is wrong, the ones who threaten MPs for not being pro-Hamas.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,088

    Interesting that the Palestinian accusations are “credible” while she believed reports of sexual violence against Israelis on October 7 were “disinformation”
    I wouldn't call it disinformation, sadly there are credible reports of sexual violence on both sides, as there tend to be in all wars.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,554
    Taz said:

    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.

    I am the publisher of this thread, there are no Islamophobic tropes in this piece.

    I have seen some of the threats made against current MPs, as I did during the Brexit impasse. The overwhelming majority of people who want peace in Gaza are non violent, there's a very small minority who are not, just like I don't tar all Brexiteers with Thomas Mair or the far right mobs who threatened to Jo Cox a few MPs.

    You owe Cyclefree an apology.
    Sadly the whole debate on Israel-Gaza is dominated by extremes. Either warmongers like the usual suspects who excuse Israels worst excesses, even ethnic cleansing, or people who think any criticism of Hamas or the pro Hamas protesters is Islamophobic.

    It is depressing. Quite frankly I expected better from here.
    Yes, it’s depressing. Fortunately the whole opposition day shenanigans remains a bubble story of marginal salience. Long may it stay that way. But there will be temptations for some politicians to encourage more of this because it might help them in the election.
  • Options

    Shenanigans in Parliament just reinforce the absolute need for reform - a lot of this goes back to the speaker rows of the 00s (expenses) and then Bercow and the Boris antics (proroguing parliament etc) and now this where the Speaker bends to pressure (for a range of reasons I sense) and thats even before we get on to PM patronage powers, Peerages and the Lords... hopefully some glimmer might be it reinforces the need for political reform of Parliament but I'll not hold my breath.

    Yup. And that is an opinion shared by Hoyle. He made the point that the standing order forcing the order of votes was outdated and needed to be changed.
  • Options
    OnlyLivingBoyOnlyLivingBoy Posts: 15,088

    On topic, perhaps Speaker Hoyle was right to the deny the SNP amendment, given the dark heart of Scottish Nationalism.

    Yousaf urged to suspend MSP who said it was legitimate to criticise ‘the Jews’

    John Mason accused of making ‘appalling antisemitic comment’ in Gaza debate at Holyrood


    Humza Yousaf has been urged to suspend an SNP MSP who said it was legitimate to criticise “the Jews” because of the Bible’s teachings.

    In a debate at Holyrood about the war in Gaza, John Mason, who has often fallen foul of his party leadership for a series of controversial comments, said it was possible not to be antisemitic while criticising the Israeli state.

    However, he added that “neither are the two completely distinct and unconnected” because most Jewish people in the UK had relations or friends in Israel.

    “It is the only Jewish state in the world and, according to the Bible, is the land which God gave his chosen people,” Mason said.

    “Now, having said that, it does not mean that we cannot criticise the Jews or Israel. God himself is hugely critical of his people in much of the scriptures, not least when he punished them by exiling them to Babylon and elsewhere.

    “So, it is not antisemitic for some to say that the present Israeli offensive has been over the top and has possibly crossed the line from defence to revenge.”


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/yousaf-urged-to-suspend-msp-who-said-it-was-legitimate-to-criticise-the-jews-cj5nxw0ch

    The SNP certainly has some interesting characters within it.
  • Options
    Big_G_NorthWalesBig_G_NorthWales Posts: 60,256
    edited February 23
    Good morning

    Yet again @Cyclefree identifies the issues correctly and to those who think it is all irrelevant or a Westminster story you couldn't be more wrong

    MPs fear is well documented and cowering to the baying mob outside the house who project an antisemitic saying onto the HOC whilst the police stand and watch is not only wrong, but utterly frightening

    Indeed unless something is done I fear the next election will be one where violence and intimidation occur like never before and you can see some of that already in the Rochdale by election due next Thursday

    I have never felt more depressed about our politics and politicians than I do now
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,842

    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.

    truth hurts
  • Options

    Good morning

    Yet again @Cyclefree identifies the issues correctly and to those who think it is all irrelevant or a Westminster story you couldn't be more wrong

    MPs fear is well documented and cowering to the baying mob outside the house who project an antisemitic saying onto the HOC whilst the police stand and watch is not only wrong, but utterly frightening

    Indeed unless something is done I fear the next election will be one where violence and intimidation occur like never before and you can see some of that already in the Rochdale by election due next Thursday

    I have never felt more depressed about our politics and politicians than I do now

    I agree with your final sentence. But having read the various motions my view is that the SNP motion was designed to inflame the mob, and to do so for narrowly partisan reasons.

    The mob want to finger Israel as uniquely to blame - something written into the SNP motion. The actual motion passed by the house took that out. Something which I would imagine the mob wouldn't have liked.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,842
    IanB2 said:

    Of all the aspects of this fiasco, the fact that it might suggest that threats of violence have some effect is the one that worries me the least. No-one who had made or is thinking of making such threats is going to see having a Labour amendment taken on an SNP opposition day as any kind of victory, or anything worth having, or worth trying to repeat.

    And it is noticeable, in any case, that nothing was said about this ‘security’ explanation for the Speaker’s ruling on the day; this story has emerged only after it turned into a scandal. If we do the Speaker the favour of assuming that it’s genuine, and not a convenient post hoc explanation, it is likely that Starmer put such concerns to him to try and ‘persuade’ the Speaker to make a ruling that just happened to get Starmer out of a huge political hole, security concerns or no.

    The big issue is that a combination of absurdly arcane parliamentary procedure and the appalling behaviour of members across the chamber has brought our national politics further into disrepute.

    Lying toerags plain and simple
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,842
    IanB2 said:

    None of the parties - except perhaps the LibDems who put their own amendment, which wasn’t taken (despite the Speaker’s initial explanation of wanting the “widest possible debate”…) and who appear to have kept out of the ensuing farce, comes out of this well, nor rose to what should have been an occasion for a mature, well-informed debate on a key foreign affairs concern.

    I will credit the SNP with being better informed and perhaps more concerned, because of their First Minister’s family connections, but does anyone believe they weren’t significantly motivated by the opportunity to word a motion that would create rifts within Labour?

    Does anyone believe that Labour wasn’t mostly motivated by the need to patch over and hide away its internal divisions, and the not completely resolved matter of attitudes within its party, above making a worthwhile contribution to the national debate?

    Does anyone believe that the Tories - who regularly play procedural games with opposition day debates - weren’t fully aware that by walking out and letting Labour’s amendment through, they would handily stoke the building crisis and be able to sit back and let Labour and the SNP take chunks out of each other?

    None of them put our national and political reputation above their petty partisan concerns.

    You flatter Humza who is acting in self interest , not hard to see which side he is on.
  • Options
    RattersRatters Posts: 776
    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,554
    The only news outlet seemingly publishing the original motion and all the amendments in full is the impartial National.

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/24134333.read-snps-gaza-ceasefire-motion-labours-amendment---full/

    Reading these highlights the ridiculous nature of the rows in parliament. Most readers would probably agree with 90% of the text of all amendments.

    There is nevertheless some interesting nuance.

    The original SNP motion is by far the shortest and to the point. It’s notably leaning on the Palestinian side. There’s a bit of a student politics vibe to it.

    The Labour amendment is the most wordy, opaque and couched in international diplomacy language. You can sense the committee based drafting. It loses most of its power as a result, but is fairly inoffensive.

    The Lib Dem one is also wordy. It leans a bit on the Palestinian side of the mean and personalises the message more on Netanyahu and the Likud government.

    The Tory amendment is much more clearly pro-Israeli and reads as a rebuttal to the SNP wording. It’s the most well drafted of the 4, but out of line with most public opinion on the war: it reads like something written last October rather than now.

    But these differences are really not huge.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,586
    DavidL said:

    The politics of this country deteriorate towards those of a student union. We are no longer led by serious and honourable people capable of debating serious matters as adults. Its sad, but it also reflects broader society where the centre no longer holds and one issue after another divides us without repair or reconciliation.

    We have lunatics who feel that they are entitled to disrupt and risk lives because their perception of what is required in respect of the environment is not matched by the consensus. We have the never ending bitterness of the Brexit arguments. We have, in Scotland, the wearying arguments about independence. We have partisan views on both sides about various foreign issues, whether it is who the next President of the US should be, the rights and wrongs of Ukraine and now the rights and wrongs of a war in the Middle East over which we have no influence whatsoever.

    While our political class and many others waste their time and energy on these matters our public services become ever more a source of income for those employed in them and ever less a source of services for those in need. Blatant injustices, such as those whose lives are poisoned by blood products or wrongly accused of theft go on unresolved. In Scotland the second anniversary of a police inquiry into the honesty and bookkeeping of the party of government goes by barely noted. Our armed services now share in the general disappointment.

    We need to find more common causes and better means of achieving consensus. It is easy to state but hard to do. Politics no longer even seems to attract the sort of people who might try to achieve this. It is concerning.

    The claim of decline and the suggestion of some past golden age when we were led by “serious and honourable people” seems rather ahistorical. This country has faced divisive issues before, and “lunatics” have disrupted and risked lives, from the Suffragettes to Irish republicans, far more than today’s Gaza protestors or Just Stop Oil. Get some perspective!
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,554

    Good morning

    Yet again @Cyclefree identifies the issues correctly and to those who think it is all irrelevant or a Westminster story you couldn't be more wrong

    MPs fear is well documented and cowering to the baying mob outside the house who project an antisemitic saying onto the HOC whilst the police stand and watch is not only wrong, but utterly frightening

    Indeed unless something is done I fear the next election will be one where violence and intimidation occur like never before and you can see some of that already in the Rochdale by election due next Thursday

    I have never felt more depressed about our politics and politicians than I do now

    Everyone stressing publicly about this on the airwaves is only going to inflame things further and encourage more mob behaviour. Whole thing needs to be put quietly to bed. We need to learn when to actively ignore the Middle East. Long may this remain in its box as a Westminster bubble story.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,554
    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Now we need to get oil prices down and bankrupt Putin.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,189
    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Positive PMI news this morning as well but, despite the falls in energy costs, there are signs that inflation remains sticky downwards, driven by higher wages and the knock on consequences of the troubles in the Red Sea. I still think that interest rate cuts will be further away than the current market consensus.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    TimS said:

    Good morning

    Yet again @Cyclefree identifies the issues correctly and to those who think it is all irrelevant or a Westminster story you couldn't be more wrong

    MPs fear is well documented and cowering to the baying mob outside the house who project an antisemitic saying onto the HOC whilst the police stand and watch is not only wrong, but utterly frightening

    Indeed unless something is done I fear the next election will be one where violence and intimidation occur like never before and you can see some of that already in the Rochdale by election due next Thursday

    I have never felt more depressed about our politics and politicians than I do now

    Everyone stressing publicly about this on the airwaves is only going to inflame things further and encourage more mob behaviour. Whole thing needs to be put quietly to bed. We need to learn when to actively ignore the Middle East. Long may this remain in its box as a Westminster bubble story.
    But its not a bubble story, and ignoring it will just make the problem bigger.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    DavidL said:

    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Positive PMI news this morning as well but, despite the falls in energy costs, there are signs that inflation remains sticky downwards, driven by higher wages and the knock on consequences of the troubles in the Red Sea. I still think that interest rate cuts will be further away than the current market consensus.
    And petrol is going back up

    My local station was £1.33 a litre two weeks ago and is now £1.37
  • Options
    It is wrong to say that overlooking some arcane convention in order to allow a wider debate is somehow a catastrophic surrender to the threat of violence. Political processes always evolve due to external influences. The 1970s and 1980s saw a series of measures that took politicians further away from the public as the country reacted to the threat from the IRA, but these did not bring down democracy.

    The current uptick in political violence has its roots in the 2016-19 period, when some of those now leading the charge against the protesters were themselves inflaming the mob - Enemies of the People anyone?

    Let us hope that action is taken now that should have been taken then. The events of this week do not leave me optimistic that will be the case.
  • Options

    DavidL said:

    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Positive PMI news this morning as well but, despite the falls in energy costs, there are signs that inflation remains sticky downwards, driven by higher wages and the knock on consequences of the troubles in the Red Sea. I still think that interest rate cuts will be further away than the current market consensus.
    And petrol is going back up

    My local station was £1.33 a litre two weeks ago and is now £1.37
    You need to get an electric car or hybrid.

    Helps saves money and deprives Saudi Arabia of money.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,554

    TimS said:

    Good morning

    Yet again @Cyclefree identifies the issues correctly and to those who think it is all irrelevant or a Westminster story you couldn't be more wrong

    MPs fear is well documented and cowering to the baying mob outside the house who project an antisemitic saying onto the HOC whilst the police stand and watch is not only wrong, but utterly frightening

    Indeed unless something is done I fear the next election will be one where violence and intimidation occur like never before and you can see some of that already in the Rochdale by election due next Thursday

    I have never felt more depressed about our politics and politicians than I do now

    Everyone stressing publicly about this on the airwaves is only going to inflame things further and encourage more mob behaviour. Whole thing needs to be put quietly to bed. We need to learn when to actively ignore the Middle East. Long may this remain in its box as a Westminster bubble story.
    But its not a bubble story, and ignoring it will just make the problem bigger.
    I disagree on both points. Look at today’s front pages. Thankfully

    The message to the mob from all the shouting the last two days is “look, if you make MPs feel intimidated you can influence what happens in parliament”. This being blown up more just encourages them and gives them ideas.
  • Options
    TimSTimS Posts: 9,554

    It is wrong to say that overlooking some arcane convention in order to allow a wider debate is somehow a catastrophic surrender to the threat of violence. Political processes always evolve due to external influences. The 1970s and 1980s saw a series of measures that took politicians further away from the public as the country reacted to the threat from the IRA, but these did not bring down democracy.

    The current uptick in political violence has its roots in the 2016-19 period, when some of those now leading the charge against the protesters were themselves inflaming the mob - Enemies of the People anyone?

    Let us hope that action is taken now that should have been taken then. The events of this week do not leave me optimistic that will be the case.

    We still have significantly less political violence in this country than at most times in our history.
  • Options
    twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,076
    edited February 23
    The whole shitshow just proves that Parliament-the politicians, the building itself, the outdated procedures and traditions- just isn't fit for purpose and no longer functions. That Westminster can be bought to its knees because of an ancient war in a land thousands of miles away, where the combatants couldn't care less about our showboating politicians is a sign of just how low our elected representatives have fallen and how out of touch it is.
    We can't build or repair stuff, can't keep our population healthy, can't afford to tackle crime or put criminals in prison, can't have a functioning miltary or even fire missiles. The list of our failures is endless. But we can fuck about around about how important we are on the world stage....not!
    It's shameful, and we deserve better.
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,141
    Superb piece, Cyclefree.
    On Today this morning in a piece about the legitimacy of protesting outside MPs' homes I heard "Just Stop Oil" become "Just Stop Tory Oil"
  • Options
    TimS said:

    It is wrong to say that overlooking some arcane convention in order to allow a wider debate is somehow a catastrophic surrender to the threat of violence. Political processes always evolve due to external influences. The 1970s and 1980s saw a series of measures that took politicians further away from the public as the country reacted to the threat from the IRA, but these did not bring down democracy.

    The current uptick in political violence has its roots in the 2016-19 period, when some of those now leading the charge against the protesters were themselves inflaming the mob - Enemies of the People anyone?

    Let us hope that action is taken now that should have been taken then. The events of this week do not leave me optimistic that will be the case.

    We still have significantly less political violence in this country than at most times in our history.
    I agree. This is why I say that the idea the Speaker's action are some massive surrender to political violence is simply not correct.

    That said, and to bring together the two discussions currently in this thread, political violence is similar to inflation in that if action is not taken to address it, then it can become entrenched and pose a greater problem down the line.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,189

    DavidL said:

    The politics of this country deteriorate towards those of a student union. We are no longer led by serious and honourable people capable of debating serious matters as adults. Its sad, but it also reflects broader society where the centre no longer holds and one issue after another divides us without repair or reconciliation.

    We have lunatics who feel that they are entitled to disrupt and risk lives because their perception of what is required in respect of the environment is not matched by the consensus. We have the never ending bitterness of the Brexit arguments. We have, in Scotland, the wearying arguments about independence. We have partisan views on both sides about various foreign issues, whether it is who the next President of the US should be, the rights and wrongs of Ukraine and now the rights and wrongs of a war in the Middle East over which we have no influence whatsoever.

    While our political class and many others waste their time and energy on these matters our public services become ever more a source of income for those employed in them and ever less a source of services for those in need. Blatant injustices, such as those whose lives are poisoned by blood products or wrongly accused of theft go on unresolved. In Scotland the second anniversary of a police inquiry into the honesty and bookkeeping of the party of government goes by barely noted. Our armed services now share in the general disappointment.

    We need to find more common causes and better means of achieving consensus. It is easy to state but hard to do. Politics no longer even seems to attract the sort of people who might try to achieve this. It is concerning.

    The claim of decline and the suggestion of some past golden age when we were led by “serious and honourable people” seems rather ahistorical. This country has faced divisive issues before, and “lunatics” have disrupted and risked lives, from the Suffragettes to Irish republicans, far more than today’s Gaza protestors or Just Stop Oil. Get some perspective!
    The response to such threats in the past have been national unity or a change in the consensus. Our society is far more splintered now.

    I think the internet has had a major effect on this. It allows the nutters to find each other. More significantly, it allows, indeed with various algorithms positively encourages, echo chambers and alternative truths. The internet has brought many positive things, not least our opportunity to courteously debate these matters on PB, but it is making holding society together into a cohesive whole much more difficult.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,586
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The politics of this country deteriorate towards those of a student union. We are no longer led by serious and honourable people capable of debating serious matters as adults. Its sad, but it also reflects broader society where the centre no longer holds and one issue after another divides us without repair or reconciliation.

    We have lunatics who feel that they are entitled to disrupt and risk lives because their perception of what is required in respect of the environment is not matched by the consensus. We have the never ending bitterness of the Brexit arguments. We have, in Scotland, the wearying arguments about independence. We have partisan views on both sides about various foreign issues, whether it is who the next President of the US should be, the rights and wrongs of Ukraine and now the rights and wrongs of a war in the Middle East over which we have no influence whatsoever.

    While our political class and many others waste their time and energy on these matters our public services become ever more a source of income for those employed in them and ever less a source of services for those in need. Blatant injustices, such as those whose lives are poisoned by blood products or wrongly accused of theft go on unresolved. In Scotland the second anniversary of a police inquiry into the honesty and bookkeeping of the party of government goes by barely noted. Our armed services now share in the general disappointment.

    We need to find more common causes and better means of achieving consensus. It is easy to state but hard to do. Politics no longer even seems to attract the sort of people who might try to achieve this. It is concerning.

    The claim of decline and the suggestion of some past golden age when we were led by “serious and honourable people” seems rather ahistorical. This country has faced divisive issues before, and “lunatics” have disrupted and risked lives, from the Suffragettes to Irish republicans, far more than today’s Gaza protestors or Just Stop Oil. Get some perspective!
    The response to such threats in the past have been national unity or a change in the consensus. Our society is far more splintered now.

    I think the internet has had a major effect on this. It allows the nutters to find each other. More significantly, it allows, indeed with various algorithms positively encourages, echo chambers and alternative truths. The internet has brought many positive things, not least our opportunity to courteously debate these matters on PB, but it is making holding society together into a cohesive whole much more difficult.
    “The response to such threats in the past have been national unity or a change in the consensus.” That’s a laughable response.

    I do agree that the Internet “allows the nutters to find each other” and that there are challenges for modern society because of that, but there’s no need to invent some prelapsarian fantasy.
  • Options
    Edit to add, we can't even call for a damn, meaningless ceasefire without turning it into a shitshow!
  • Options
    RattersRatters Posts: 776
    DavidL said:

    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Positive PMI news this morning as well but, despite the falls in energy costs, there are signs that inflation remains sticky downwards, driven by higher wages and the knock on consequences of the troubles in the Red Sea. I still think that interest rate cuts will be further away than the current market consensus.
    I would take the contrary view. Headline inflation will likely be below 2% by April's release (announced in mid May) and fall further the next month. I see little to stop cuts in the summer as expected by the markes.
  • Options
    viewcodeviewcode Posts: 18,697

    Good morning

    Yet again @Cyclefree identifies the issues correctly and to those who think it is all irrelevant or a Westminster story you couldn't be more wrong

    MPs fear is well documented and cowering to the baying mob outside the house who project an antisemitic saying onto the HOC whilst the police stand and watch is not only wrong, but utterly frightening

    Indeed unless something is done I fear the next election will be one where violence and intimidation occur like never before and you can see some of that already in the Rochdale by election due next Thursday

    I have never felt more depressed about our politics and politicians than I do now

    If it helps, if you look at the election night coverages of the elections in the 1970s, it was worse then. In one of them a bomb goes off in NI, and it's covered in less than a minute.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,119
    Jonathan said:

    What could have people done differently to avoid this chaos.

    The SNP could have sought consensus and created a unifying statement and downplayed partisan posturing.
    The Conservatives could have supported the speakers motives, allowed the vote and used their majority to assert their authority
    Labour could have adopted a more aggressive position against Israel and backed the snp motion.
    Hoyle could have ignored the safety fears of MPs and rigidly stuck to old rules.

    When you look at it this way, of the main actors, the SNP and the Conservatives were in the position to be most constructive. Hoyle is not the villain.

    The SNP thought they were being clever laying a trap for Labour and it backfired on them.

    That's life.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 38,937

    Edit to add, we can't even call for a damn, meaningless ceasefire without turning it into a shitshow!

    Because calling for a damn, meaningless ceasefire is, by definition, a shitshow...
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,119
    TimS said:



    The original SNP motion is by far the shortest and to the point. It’s notably leaning on the Palestinian side. There’s a bit of a student politics vibe to it.

    What a shock.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,504
    geoffw said:

    Superb piece, Cyclefree.
    On Today this morning in a piece about the legitimacy of protesting outside MPs' homes I heard "Just Stop Oil" become "Just Stop Tory Oil"

    Indeed. That lady on R4 Today had been well trained in not answering the question, was shouty, was purporting to speak only for the 'non violent' - which rendered her contribution a bit marginal in world full of quiet (and noisy) intimidation and threat, and plainly was incapable of comprehending the idea that views other than her own had a place.
  • Options
    TazTaz Posts: 11,119
    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Cornwall Insight were saying it should be 14% and it is less than that.

    The regulator is the energy companies friend, not the consumers.
  • Options
    TimS said:

    Good morning

    Yet again @Cyclefree identifies the issues correctly and to those who think it is all irrelevant or a Westminster story you couldn't be more wrong

    MPs fear is well documented and cowering to the baying mob outside the house who project an antisemitic saying onto the HOC whilst the police stand and watch is not only wrong, but utterly frightening

    Indeed unless something is done I fear the next election will be one where violence and intimidation occur like never before and you can see some of that already in the Rochdale by election due next Thursday

    I have never felt more depressed about our politics and politicians than I do now

    Everyone stressing publicly about this on the airwaves is only going to inflame things further and encourage more mob behaviour. Whole thing needs to be put quietly to bed. We need to learn when to actively ignore the Middle East. Long may this remain in its box as a Westminster bubble story.
    Unfortunately the SNP will politicise this all the way to the election in their cause for independence from the 'English Westminster'
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,471
    .

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The politics of this country deteriorate towards those of a student union. We are no longer led by serious and honourable people capable of debating serious matters as adults. Its sad, but it also reflects broader society where the centre no longer holds and one issue after another divides us without repair or reconciliation.

    We have lunatics who feel that they are entitled to disrupt and risk lives because their perception of what is required in respect of the environment is not matched by the consensus. We have the never ending bitterness of the Brexit arguments. We have, in Scotland, the wearying arguments about independence. We have partisan views on both sides about various foreign issues, whether it is who the next President of the US should be, the rights and wrongs of Ukraine and now the rights and wrongs of a war in the Middle East over which we have no influence whatsoever.

    While our political class and many others waste their time and energy on these matters our public services become ever more a source of income for those employed in them and ever less a source of services for those in need. Blatant injustices, such as those whose lives are poisoned by blood products or wrongly accused of theft go on unresolved. In Scotland the second anniversary of a police inquiry into the honesty and bookkeeping of the party of government goes by barely noted. Our armed services now share in the general disappointment.

    We need to find more common causes and better means of achieving consensus. It is easy to state but hard to do. Politics no longer even seems to attract the sort of people who might try to achieve this. It is concerning.

    The claim of decline and the suggestion of some past golden age when we were led by “serious and honourable people” seems rather ahistorical. This country has faced divisive issues before, and “lunatics” have disrupted and risked lives, from the Suffragettes to Irish republicans, far more than today’s Gaza protestors or Just Stop Oil. Get some perspective!
    The response to such threats in the past have been national unity or a change in the consensus. Our society is far more splintered now.

    I think the internet has had a major effect on this. It allows the nutters to find each other. More significantly, it allows, indeed with various algorithms positively encourages, echo chambers and alternative truths. The internet has brought many positive things, not least our opportunity to courteously debate these matters on PB, but it is making holding society together into a cohesive whole much more difficult.
    “The response to such threats in the past have been national unity or a change in the consensus.” That’s a laughable response.

    I do agree that the Internet “allows the nutters to find each other” and that there are challenges for modern society because of that, but there’s no need to invent some prelapsarian fantasy.
    Indeed.

    How long ago is that imagined past ? If it exists, which I doubt, it certainly predates the publication of The Satanic Verses in 1989.

    Here's a 2009 article on that, rehearsing many of the same arguments we're having today.
    https://www.theguardian.com/books/2009/jan/11/salman-rushdie-satanic-verses
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,504

    The whole shitshow just proves that Parliament-the politicians, the building itself, the outdated procedures and traditions- just isn't fit for purpose and no longer functions. That Westminster can be bought to its knees because of an ancient war in a land thousands of miles away, where the combatants couldn't care less about our showboating politicians is a sign of just how low our elected representatives have fallen and how out of touch it is.
    We can't build or repair stuff, can't keep our population healthy, can't afford to tackle crime or put criminals in prison, can't have a functioning miltary or even fire missiles. The list of our failures is endless. But we can fuck about around about how important we are on the world stage....not!
    It's shameful, and we deserve better.

    Excellent rhetoric, but the substance behind the attack about being old fashioned is actually on a much more basic idea - that all can vote, all can organise politically, and all can stand to be elected.

    If 'all can vote, all can organise and all can stand' isn't the solution, it is necessary to suggest what is. And what other means than representative democracy would be the way of finding out whether we like the new suggestions?

    We are all critics of the competence of government and of our representatives, sure, but is it possible to point to countries whose fundamental politics is completely different, and do it all much better than us?
  • Options
    Cleverly backs Hoyle

    It looks as if Hoyle is safe which is a good thing as he is a decent speaker even if he, by his own admission, made a mistake
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,317

    On topic, perhaps Speaker Hoyle was right to the deny the SNP amendment, given the dark heart of Scottish Nationalism.

    Yousaf urged to suspend MSP who said it was legitimate to criticise ‘the Jews’

    John Mason accused of making ‘appalling antisemitic comment’ in Gaza debate at Holyrood


    Humza Yousaf has been urged to suspend an SNP MSP who said it was legitimate to criticise “the Jews” because of the Bible’s teachings.

    In a debate at Holyrood about the war in Gaza, John Mason, who has often fallen foul of his party leadership for a series of controversial comments, said it was possible not to be antisemitic while criticising the Israeli state.

    However, he added that “neither are the two completely distinct and unconnected” because most Jewish people in the UK had relations or friends in Israel.

    “It is the only Jewish state in the world and, according to the Bible, is the land which God gave his chosen people,” Mason said.

    “Now, having said that, it does not mean that we cannot criticise the Jews or Israel. God himself is hugely critical of his people in much of the scriptures, not least when he punished them by exiling them to Babylon and elsewhere.

    “So, it is not antisemitic for some to say that the present Israeli offensive has been over the top and has possibly crossed the line from defence to revenge.”


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/yousaf-urged-to-suspend-msp-who-said-it-was-legitimate-to-criticise-the-jews-cj5nxw0ch

    As ever, the simple trick is to flip it around.

    Is it ok to criticise the "Muslims" for the actions of a Muslim state? Nope.

    The government of the state is the entity with the moral agency.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,471
    Notable in the R4 discussion this morning, which went over much the same ground as Cyclefree's header, was the suggestion that the government plan to address the problem of intimidation by "increasing police powers".

    AFAICS, the police have all the powers they might need.
    What's lacking are the resources, or the determination, or the understanding of how they might go about it.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,253
    Chris said:

    I think this kind of attack would be better published above the writer's name rather than under a pseudonym.

    I don't object to it, but am not particularly impressed by it, either. Sometimes the author perhaps slips into preferring to grandstand rather than say something more constructive.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 10,504
    TimS said:

    It is wrong to say that overlooking some arcane convention in order to allow a wider debate is somehow a catastrophic surrender to the threat of violence. Political processes always evolve due to external influences. The 1970s and 1980s saw a series of measures that took politicians further away from the public as the country reacted to the threat from the IRA, but these did not bring down democracy.

    The current uptick in political violence has its roots in the 2016-19 period, when some of those now leading the charge against the protesters were themselves inflaming the mob - Enemies of the People anyone?

    Let us hope that action is taken now that should have been taken then. The events of this week do not leave me optimistic that will be the case.

    We still have significantly less political violence in this country than at most times in our history.
    Look up the Gordon riots. They were gigantically destructive. Even better read Dickens's wonderful and neglected novel featuring them, Barnaby Rudge - a masterpiece.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,471
    viewcode said:

    Good morning

    Yet again @Cyclefree identifies the issues correctly and to those who think it is all irrelevant or a Westminster story you couldn't be more wrong

    MPs fear is well documented and cowering to the baying mob outside the house who project an antisemitic saying onto the HOC whilst the police stand and watch is not only wrong, but utterly frightening

    Indeed unless something is done I fear the next election will be one where violence and intimidation occur like never before and you can see some of that already in the Rochdale by election due next Thursday

    I have never felt more depressed about our politics and politicians than I do now

    If it helps, if you look at the election night coverages of the elections in the 1970s, it was worse then. In one of them a bomb goes off in NI, and it's covered in less than a minute.
    Those old enough to have been around at the time won't recall much 'national unity' over how to address the NI problem.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,317
    Sandpit said:

    ydoethur said:

    This thread is an islamophobic trope you should be ashamed of it.

    It is a complete lie people protesting against a genocide are threatening violence. The only threats they are issuing are that they won't vote for those MPs complicit in Genocide.

    Let's do a swap of all 650 MPs send them to live in Gaza for a month living in the conditions of typical Gazans and bring 650 Gazans to the UK permanently.

    Any surviving MPs who return after the month can then decide if a ceasefire is required or not.

    MPs are forced to wear stab vests because people are threatening not to vote for them?
    A stab vest will be of little use under my MP Gazan swap scheme.

    Do MPs where stab vests?
    The Jewish MPs do wear stab vests, yes.
    The non-violent are often somewhat unable to understand that their cause is a river which can include the deliberately violent and threatening.

    See the attempts, in the trans issue, to deny the rape threats that are made against women as a specific.

    A few years back, some on the Corbynite Left wanted to get the subsidy for private security at Synagogues and other Jewish culture locations stopped. They claimed that there *couldn't* be a problem. Despite the evidence of frequent racist attacks.
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,706
    TimS said:

    The only news outlet seemingly publishing the original motion and all the amendments in full is the impartial National.

    https://www.thenational.scot/news/24134333.read-snps-gaza-ceasefire-motion-labours-amendment---full/

    Reading these highlights the ridiculous nature of the rows in parliament. Most readers would probably agree with 90% of the text of all amendments.

    There is nevertheless some interesting nuance.

    The original SNP motion is by far the shortest and to the point. It’s notably leaning on the Palestinian side. There’s a bit of a student politics vibe to it.

    The Labour amendment is the most wordy, opaque and couched in international diplomacy language. You can sense the committee based drafting. It loses most of its power as a result, but is fairly inoffensive.

    The Lib Dem one is also wordy. It leans a bit on the Palestinian side of the mean and personalises the message more on Netanyahu and the Likud government.

    The Tory amendment is much more clearly pro-Israeli and reads as a rebuttal to the SNP wording. It’s the most well drafted of the 4, but out of line with most public opinion on the war: it reads like something written last October rather than now.

    But these differences are really not huge.

    Good post, it would be trivial to write a message calling for an end to the war that 80%+ of the UK agreed with. Yet our politicians continually seek to divide us. We need different politicians and a different way of politics.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,253

    What the thread ignores totally is that in acting as he did, Hoyle frustrated the aim of the left extremists who certainly contain within their numbers many of those making threats against Labour MPs and have seen to exploit the issue of Gaza for their own political ends.

    They too are really pissed off that Hoyle denied them the opportunity of the spectacle of Labour MPs voting against the SNP motion while being unable to vote in support of a Labour amendment calling for an immediate ceasefire.

    So in acting as he did, Hoyle frustrated these people. Whatever Hoyle's motivation for his actions, frustrating them is one of the outcomes. So if he ended up doing the opposite of what those practicising intimidation would have wanted, it hardly amounts to the appeasement claimed in the thread, does it?

    I also find the thread pretty one-sided, to be honest. A pretty open attack on Starmer for using the threat of violence for political advantage, yet total silence on the way that the SNP and Conservatives also cooperated to try and gain political advantage by using the issue of Gaza to open up splits in Labour, effectively distracting from any focus on the substance of the outrage that is happening there.

    Total silence. Apart from the long post I made above saying exactly the same.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,973
    Mr. Above, but what way is that?
  • Options
    noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 20,706

    Mr. Above, but what way is that?

    Too long to go into. Read my posts over a year, discount the 75% frivalous ones, the 10% I get wrong, the 5% full of typos and you will know precisely what I mean.
  • Options
    CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 39,635

    DavidL said:

    The politics of this country deteriorate towards those of a student union. We are no longer led by serious and honourable people capable of debating serious matters as adults. Its sad, but it also reflects broader society where the centre no longer holds and one issue after another divides us without repair or reconciliation.

    We have lunatics who feel that they are entitled to disrupt and risk lives because their perception of what is required in respect of the environment is not matched by the consensus. We have the never ending bitterness of the Brexit arguments. We have, in Scotland, the wearying arguments about independence. We have partisan views on both sides about various foreign issues, whether it is who the next President of the US should be, the rights and wrongs of Ukraine and now the rights and wrongs of a war in the Middle East over which we have no influence whatsoever.

    While our political class and many others waste their time and energy on these matters our public services become ever more a source of income for those employed in them and ever less a source of services for those in need. Blatant injustices, such as those whose lives are poisoned by blood products or wrongly accused of theft go on unresolved. In Scotland the second anniversary of a police inquiry into the honesty and bookkeeping of the party of government goes by barely noted. Our armed services now share in the general disappointment.

    We need to find more common causes and better means of achieving consensus. It is easy to state but hard to do. Politics no longer even seems to attract the sort of people who might try to achieve this. It is concerning.

    The claim of decline and the suggestion of some past golden age when we were led by “serious and honourable people” seems rather ahistorical. This country has faced divisive issues before, and “lunatics” have disrupted and risked lives, from the Suffragettes to Irish republicans, far more than today’s Gaza protestors or Just Stop Oil. Get some perspective!
    The other thing that strikes me - I will say this again - is SKS blending his partisan wishes with corporate parliamentary business. At Holyrood, the Parliament is much more clearly demarcated from the Government in organizational terminology and procedure. The Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body would deal with the issues of parliamentary business such as security (including liaising with the police, etc.) just as it did with demonstrations on the parliamentary estate. But I see no move towards - for instance - appointing a Westminster committee to discuss the MPs security issue, which (as I also noted yesterday) is a serious one.

    That's one reason I don't find SKS and Mr Hoyle credible at present. Firstly for using security as an excuse for the last two days and secondly for not addressing it properly.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,317

    In other news, it looks as though the cladding on the building was a major factor in the tragic building fire in Spain.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-68374811

    Utterly to be expected. This crap was sold all over the world.

    https://www.skynews.com.au/world-news/dubai-buildings-cladding-questioned-after-35storey-apartment-catches-fire-and-flames-soar-up-the-side-of-complex/news-story/55749716c20650033d9d9897ca825b69
  • Options

    On topic, perhaps Speaker Hoyle was right to the deny the SNP amendment, given the dark heart of Scottish Nationalism.

    Yousaf urged to suspend MSP who said it was legitimate to criticise ‘the Jews’

    John Mason accused of making ‘appalling antisemitic comment’ in Gaza debate at Holyrood


    Humza Yousaf has been urged to suspend an SNP MSP who said it was legitimate to criticise “the Jews” because of the Bible’s teachings.

    In a debate at Holyrood about the war in Gaza, John Mason, who has often fallen foul of his party leadership for a series of controversial comments, said it was possible not to be antisemitic while criticising the Israeli state.

    However, he added that “neither are the two completely distinct and unconnected” because most Jewish people in the UK had relations or friends in Israel.

    “It is the only Jewish state in the world and, according to the Bible, is the land which God gave his chosen people,” Mason said.

    “Now, having said that, it does not mean that we cannot criticise the Jews or Israel. God himself is hugely critical of his people in much of the scriptures, not least when he punished them by exiling them to Babylon and elsewhere.

    “So, it is not antisemitic for some to say that the present Israeli offensive has been over the top and has possibly crossed the line from defence to revenge.”


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/yousaf-urged-to-suspend-msp-who-said-it-was-legitimate-to-criticise-the-jews-cj5nxw0ch

    As ever, the simple trick is to flip it around.

    Is it ok to criticise the "Muslims" for the actions of a Muslim state? Nope.

    The government of the state is the entity with the moral agency.
    Although we have seen people claiming the people of Gaza are responsible for the actions of Hamas.
  • Options

    On topic, perhaps Speaker Hoyle was right to the deny the SNP amendment, given the dark heart of Scottish Nationalism.

    Yousaf urged to suspend MSP who said it was legitimate to criticise ‘the Jews’

    John Mason accused of making ‘appalling antisemitic comment’ in Gaza debate at Holyrood


    Humza Yousaf has been urged to suspend an SNP MSP who said it was legitimate to criticise “the Jews” because of the Bible’s teachings.

    In a debate at Holyrood about the war in Gaza, John Mason, who has often fallen foul of his party leadership for a series of controversial comments, said it was possible not to be antisemitic while criticising the Israeli state.

    However, he added that “neither are the two completely distinct and unconnected” because most Jewish people in the UK had relations or friends in Israel.

    “It is the only Jewish state in the world and, according to the Bible, is the land which God gave his chosen people,” Mason said.

    “Now, having said that, it does not mean that we cannot criticise the Jews or Israel. God himself is hugely critical of his people in much of the scriptures, not least when he punished them by exiling them to Babylon and elsewhere.

    “So, it is not antisemitic for some to say that the present Israeli offensive has been over the top and has possibly crossed the line from defence to revenge.”


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/yousaf-urged-to-suspend-msp-who-said-it-was-legitimate-to-criticise-the-jews-cj5nxw0ch

    As ever, the simple trick is to flip it around.

    Is it ok to criticise the "Muslims" for the actions of a Muslim state? Nope.

    The government of the state is the entity with the moral agency.
    Although we have seen people claiming the people of Gaza are responsible for the actions of Hamas.
    Indeed.
  • Options
    twistedfirestopper3twistedfirestopper3 Posts: 2,076
    edited February 23
    They could have had a couple of hours debate. Make an impassioned, but ultimately meaningless call for a ceasefire and then retired to their subsidised bars and restaurants for a well earned rest (the ones that turn up, anyway)
    Instead they are so wound up in their self importance and grandstanding that they end up hurting themselves even more.
    An easy win for any one vaguely interested in the result, rather than the grandstanding.
  • Options
    MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 44,317
    Nigelb said:

    Notable in the R4 discussion this morning, which went over much the same ground as Cyclefree's header, was the suggestion that the government plan to address the problem of intimidation by "increasing police powers".

    AFAICS, the police have all the powers they might need.
    What's lacking are the resources, or the determination, or the understanding of how they might go about it.

    The police recently made it clear that they have no interest in arresting everyone who makes threats against public figures.
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,144
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    The politics of this country deteriorate towards those of a student union. We are no longer led by serious and honourable people capable of debating serious matters as adults. Its sad, but it also reflects broader society where the centre no longer holds and one issue after another divides us without repair or reconciliation.

    We have lunatics who feel that they are entitled to disrupt and risk lives because their perception of what is required in respect of the environment is not matched by the consensus. We have the never ending bitterness of the Brexit arguments. We have, in Scotland, the wearying arguments about independence. We have partisan views on both sides about various foreign issues, whether it is who the next President of the US should be, the rights and wrongs of Ukraine and now the rights and wrongs of a war in the Middle East over which we have no influence whatsoever.

    While our political class and many others waste their time and energy on these matters our public services become ever more a source of income for those employed in them and ever less a source of services for those in need. Blatant injustices, such as those whose lives are poisoned by blood products or wrongly accused of theft go on unresolved. In Scotland the second anniversary of a police inquiry into the honesty and bookkeeping of the party of government goes by barely noted. Our armed services now share in the general disappointment.

    We need to find more common causes and better means of achieving consensus. It is easy to state but hard to do. Politics no longer even seems to attract the sort of people who might try to achieve this. It is concerning.

    The claim of decline and the suggestion of some past golden age when we were led by “serious and honourable people” seems rather ahistorical. This country has faced divisive issues before, and “lunatics” have disrupted and risked lives, from the Suffragettes to Irish republicans, far more than today’s Gaza protestors or Just Stop Oil. Get some perspective!
    The response to such threats in the past have been national unity or a change in the consensus. Our society is far more splintered now.

    I think the internet has had a major effect on this. It allows the nutters to find each other. More significantly, it allows, indeed with various algorithms positively encourages, echo chambers and alternative truths. The internet has brought many positive things, not least our opportunity to courteously debate these matters on PB, but it is making holding society together into a cohesive whole much more difficult.
    The formation of niche interest groups isn't really the problem. That happened in a pre-internet age, albeit it is easier now.

    The problem is that the ideas of nutters are more convincing than the ideas of non-nutters. And part of the reason for that is that self-identified non-nutters got lazy and were dishonest and dissembling, maybe only a little at first, but respecting the truth is a habit and something that has to be nurtured, not neglected. And in a contrast between lying a little and lying a lot - lying a lot wins.

    Another part of the problem is that the non-nutters are promising only more of the same ideas, the ideas that have created the problems that people are so unhappy about. If the only alternative offered to them is a nutty one, then desperate people will take that over the status quo.

    This is what happened in the 1930s - it's not exactly unprecedented - and it wasn't caused by the internet back then.
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,005
    Totally normal ex PM.


  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,309
    edited February 23

    Totally normal ex PM.


    Did she say Deep State except in explaining that our quangos were similar to what Trump called the deep state?

    And grifting in America is, sadly, normal for ex-PMs.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,906

    DavidL said:

    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Positive PMI news this morning as well but, despite the falls in energy costs, there are signs that inflation remains sticky downwards, driven by higher wages and the knock on consequences of the troubles in the Red Sea. I still think that interest rate cuts will be further away than the current market consensus.
    And petrol is going back up

    My local station was £1.33 a litre two weeks ago and is now £1.37
    You need to get an electric car or hybrid.

    Helps saves money and deprives Saudi Arabia of money.
    If the petrol is £1.35 then the split is £0.60 fuel and £0.75 tax (Duty, VAT and amusingly duty ON the VAT !)

    For your £0.60 you get 8.9 kwH of fuel, so the actual cost is 6.74 pence per kwh.

    Figures for diesel are pretty much the same bearing in mind the slightly higher price but greater calorific density of diesel.

    Working it out I get about 1.8 miles/kwH (~55 mpg), whilst EVs get about 4.8.

    Here's the thing though, the price per kwh for leccy is 30p at home, or about 28p ex tax and far more on the road (80p at superchargers for non Tesla)

    Which I work out as at least 1.5 times more expensive before the effects of taxation are considered. Now if you're on Octopus tariff and restrict charging between midnight and 4 am at home it makes sense, but charging anywhere else is a big cost to both yourself and also the treasury !

    How is the Gov't going to get back all the fuel duty receipts when we're all on EVs ?

  • Options
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Positive PMI news this morning as well but, despite the falls in energy costs, there are signs that inflation remains sticky downwards, driven by higher wages and the knock on consequences of the troubles in the Red Sea. I still think that interest rate cuts will be further away than the current market consensus.
    And petrol is going back up

    My local station was £1.33 a litre two weeks ago and is now £1.37
    You need to get an electric car or hybrid.

    Helps saves money and deprives Saudi Arabia of money.
    If the petrol is £1.35 then the split is £0.60 fuel and £0.75 tax (Duty, VAT and amusingly duty ON the VAT !)

    For your £0.60 you get 8.9 kwH of fuel, so the actual cost is 6.74 pence per kwh.

    Figures for diesel are pretty much the same bearing in mind the slightly higher price but greater calorific density of diesel.

    Working it out I get about 1.8 miles/kwH (~55 mpg), whilst EVs get about 4.8.

    Here's the thing though, the price per kwh for leccy is 30p at home, or about 28p ex tax and far more on the road (80p at superchargers for non Tesla)

    Which I work out as at least 1.5 times more expensive before the effects of taxation are considered. Now if you're on Octopus tariff and restrict charging between midnight and 4 am at home it makes sense, but charging anywhere else is a big cost to both yourself and also the treasury !

    How is the Gov't going to get back all the fuel duty receipts when we're all on EVs ?

    Tax on all foreigners living abroad.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,586
    After the 2017 election, May's government refused to amend or divide the House for any Opposition Day motion, an approach that if taken now would have stymied the SNP's plans. Those decrying what happened now, were you criticising those actions then?
  • Options
    TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 40,005
    edited February 23

    Totally normal ex PM.


    Did she say Deep State except in explaining that our quangos were similar to what Trump called the deep state?

    And grifting in America is, sadly, normal for ex-PMs.
    That is kind of saying ‘Deep State’. In any case she said the DS was out to get her and they did.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,309
    edited February 23

    Totally normal ex PM.


    Did she say Deep State except in explaining that our quangos were similar to what Trump called the deep state?

    And grifting in America is, sadly, normal for ex-PMs.
    That is kind of saying ‘Deep State’. In any case she said the DS was out to get her and they did.
    In Liz Truss's case, it was her sidelining the quangos (or deep state) that brought her down.

    ETA and that can be traced back to her swallowing George Osborne's bile against the finest Chancellor of our times, and so Truss not appreciating why Gordon Brown made the Bank of England independent. Oh, and then George Osborne's too cute by half OBR, designed to trip Labour.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,358
    edited February 23
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Positive PMI news this morning as well but, despite the falls in energy costs, there are signs that inflation remains sticky downwards, driven by higher wages and the knock on consequences of the troubles in the Red Sea. I still think that interest rate cuts will be further away than the current market consensus.
    And petrol is going back up

    My local station was £1.33 a litre two weeks ago and is now £1.37
    You need to get an electric car or hybrid.

    Helps saves money and deprives Saudi Arabia of money.
    If the petrol is £1.35 then the split is £0.60 fuel and £0.75 tax (Duty, VAT and amusingly duty ON the VAT !)

    For your £0.60 you get 8.9 kwH of fuel, so the actual cost is 6.74 pence per kwh.

    Figures for diesel are pretty much the same bearing in mind the slightly higher price but greater calorific density of diesel.

    Working it out I get about 1.8 miles/kwH (~55 mpg), whilst EVs get about 4.8.

    Here's the thing though, the price per kwh for leccy is 30p at home, or about 28p ex tax and far more on the road (80p at superchargers for non Tesla)

    Which I work out as at least 1.5 times more expensive before the effects of taxation are considered. Now if you're on Octopus tariff and restrict charging between midnight and 4 am at home it makes sense, but charging anywhere else is a big cost to both yourself and also the treasury !

    How is the Gov't going to get back all the fuel duty receipts when we're all on EVs ?

    I charge overnight when it is something like 8p per kWh between midnight and 7.
  • Options
    bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 7,586
    Pulpstar said:

    DavidL said:

    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Positive PMI news this morning as well but, despite the falls in energy costs, there are signs that inflation remains sticky downwards, driven by higher wages and the knock on consequences of the troubles in the Red Sea. I still think that interest rate cuts will be further away than the current market consensus.
    And petrol is going back up

    My local station was £1.33 a litre two weeks ago and is now £1.37
    You need to get an electric car or hybrid.

    Helps saves money and deprives Saudi Arabia of money.
    If the petrol is £1.35 then the split is £0.60 fuel and £0.75 tax (Duty, VAT and amusingly duty ON the VAT !)

    For your £0.60 you get 8.9 kwH of fuel, so the actual cost is 6.74 pence per kwh.

    Figures for diesel are pretty much the same bearing in mind the slightly higher price but greater calorific density of diesel.

    Working it out I get about 1.8 miles/kwH (~55 mpg), whilst EVs get about 4.8.

    Here's the thing though, the price per kwh for leccy is 30p at home, or about 28p ex tax and far more on the road (80p at superchargers for non Tesla)

    Which I work out as at least 1.5 times more expensive before the effects of taxation are considered. Now if you're on Octopus tariff and restrict charging between midnight and 4 am at home it makes sense, but charging anywhere else is a big cost to both yourself and also the treasury !

    How is the Gov't going to get back all the fuel duty receipts when we're all on EVs ?

    Tax the Deep State. The deeper, the more tax. Maybe 5% per metre of depth.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    Taz said:

    Ratters said:

    Off topic, from the FT: https://on.ft.com/3SSSp6X

    "The UK’s household energy price cap is set to fall by 12 per cent in April following a drop in wholesale gas and electricity prices.

    Ofgem, Britain’s energy regulator, has set the price cap for the April to June period at £1,690 a year for a typical household, down from £1,928.

    It is the lowest level for the cap since March 2022, when it stood at £1,216. However, it remains above typical levels of below £1,200 before the energy crisis that began in the winter of 2021 as wholesale prices rose."

    Based on wholesale prices, I expect the cap will be reduced further in July as well.

    Cornwall Insight were saying it should be 14% and it is less than that.

    The regulator is the energy companies friend, not the consumers.
    I actually know Mark McAllister. He head-hunted me to join him in the best job I've ever had - less like work, more like meeting your mates each day to see what mischief you could get up to.

    He's a very measured guy and I think it rather trite to suggest he is just the "energy companies friend".

    I doubt you'd say it to his face either. He's an imposing figure of a Scouser.
This discussion has been closed.