The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
Sounds counter productive. There are plenty of arms manufacturers to pick from in the bloc I'm sure, but a nearby close ally being excluded from buying or selling?
It is petty politics and not even practical
Furthermore they are in NATO with us
It's a bit more than petty politics. The EU not unreasonably wants to foster domestic defence manufacturing (in the same way the US, and indeed we do).
Whether the proposal is entirely practical is doubtful, but the motivation is fairly sensible.
It seems we are going to focus on hosting major sporting tournaments and it could have a big economic boost. That seems like a good idea to me. Much to my surprise all the ones we have done recently have been very successful, maybe because unlike other countries we have been sensible regarding the scale of the events and not made them some grand enormous event and expense.
Interestingly More or Less did a bit on why our large capital projects overrun both in time and money so badly. Apparently compared to other countries they don't. Everyone is hopeless. HS2 however was awful even by international standards
And what says "successful sporting event" more than the sight of a coked-up chav with a flare stuck up his backside?
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
UK's 'most dangerous area' revealed as top city sees 152k crimes – is your home listed? Most of the top 20 places of the UK's most dangerous areas are actually northern areas, with the south performing pretty well in the crime list . . . apart from Westminster https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/uks-most-dangerous-area-revealed-32279749
When you adjust for population, Westminster is absolutely miles ahead of anywhere else. Is it pickpockets and muggings of tourists ? They're council tax is extraordinarily cheap for the property values there, perhaps they need to raise it and spend a bit more on police for the borough ?
Yes the polls are not looking great at the moment but we have eight months to go. So there remains much to play for.
Many of us feel physically sick at the thought of a Trump Presidency, and "the Republicans look to have the Presidential election in the bag" really isn't true. If the polls remain the same come the Autumn, yes a Dictatorship will look highly likely. So for the moment at least, enough of your trolling.
Um, this is a betting site.
I have money riding on the Presidential election and I value @williamglenn sharing the data.
Fair enough, but @williamglenn only shares data favourable to Trump, which to determine betting options is sub-optimal. Granted, there isn't much positive polling for the Biden Team at present, but when there was, you didn't get the word from @williamglenn. His extrapolation from the poll right months out I objected to, and he has explained that in an earlier post, insomuch as his "joke" was that if Halley was the nominee she would walk the election. I am not sure how we can use that to determine betting for November. But a good point anyway.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
No chance of this happening, just a Daily Mail piece of anti EU nonsense.
Of course.
Our defence spend may be inadequate and largely wasted but despite that we have one of the most effective militaries in Europe and they will be desperate to keep us on board. And it is in our interests as well, of course.
On board what? The UK is committed to their defence anyway through NATO (for now). Nothing the EU decides on prioritising their own arms industry changes that.
80% of defence spending in the EU by 2035 is the target but it has to get past all 27 members without a veto.
On board an EU based defence. If Trump is elected we are going to need it. I don’t believe NATO would survive that in its current form.
The UK is not on board now. They withdrew from EUMS and were never in PESCO.
If NATO falls apart (must be >50% chance at the moment) then the UK's choice is a new bilateral arrangement with the EU or with the US. I'm not sure who will deliver the harder fucking.
NATO is adding new members, not losing them, and holding the biggest joint exercise in decades.
UK's 'most dangerous area' revealed as top city sees 152k crimes – is your home listed? Most of the top 20 places of the UK's most dangerous areas are actually northern areas, with the south performing pretty well in the crime list . . . apart from Westminster https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/uks-most-dangerous-area-revealed-32279749
A pedant notes: The top 20 safest places are also listed, one of them being the district of Eden (well named) in Cumbria. However this no longer exists. Eden is now part of Westmorland and Furness, a unitary authority which alongside Cumberland constitutes the former county of Cumbria.
So Eden, which is mostly sheep, fells, moorland, farms, towns with populations of about 2,000 (Brough, Kirkby Stephen), tiny villages etc is now in with Barrow, which makes nuclear submarines and where you can buy a house of sorts for £50K.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
No chance of this happening, just a Daily Mail piece of anti EU nonsense.
We've seen the first happen with PPE and vaccines. The second is subsidies for home suppliers, which is also SOP for the EU.
There are a few things being proposed: 1) to increase the amount of joint procurement by EU member states (from current 18% to 60% in 2035) in order to decrease costs and increase inter-operability. 2) to increase the amount of arms bought within the EU from the current 20% to 60% by 2035. 3) for the EU to collect data on stock and production within the EU 4) to have a mechanism in a crisis where companies in the EU can be forced to change their production and who they sell to.
Also a proposal to use the 500 million euros (not much really) a year the EU currently has to encourage joint procurement and buying within the EU.
Of course, none of these proposals are directed at the UK - in fact only the possibility of the unreliability of future US supplies is given as an additional motive, apart from the main motive which is to try and ensure Europe can produce the weapons it needs to defend itself against Russia.
The proposals are non-binding, so it's all aspirational. In addition, member states aren't going to agree to them (especially 3). Overall, I think calling the Daily Mail piece 'nonsense' is fair.
AfaIcs despite ‘EU’, ‘UK’ and ‘threatens’ appearing in the same headline, there isn’t a single mention of the UK by the EU officials quoted. As ever for the Mail and it’s ugly sisters, it’s always got to be about the United Kingdom of Great Britishness.
UK's 'most dangerous area' revealed as top city sees 152k crimes – is your home listed? Most of the top 20 places of the UK's most dangerous areas are actually northern areas, with the south performing pretty well in the crime list . . . apart from Westminster https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/uks-most-dangerous-area-revealed-32279749
A pedant notes: The top 20 safest places are also listed, one of them being the district of Eden (well named) in Cumbria. However this no longer exists. Eden is now part of Westmorland and Furness, a unitary authority which alongside Cumberland constitutes the former county of Cumbria.
So Eden, which is mostly sheep, fells, moorland, farms, towns with populations of about 2,000 (Brough, Kirby Stephen), tiny villages etc is now in with Barrow, which makes nuclear submarines and where you can buy a house of sorts for £50K.
If only we had someone on the board with local knowledge of the place.
Tax and NI: Person earning about 30K, an NI cut of 2% points will give them back about £350.
Fiscal drag: The same person whose pay has gone up 15% over two or three years to keep up with inflation will be paying IT and NI on an extra 4.5K. This is roughly an extra £1250.
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
Part of the problem is that psychologists and other academics are not allowed to study juries.
UK's 'most dangerous area' revealed as top city sees 152k crimes – is your home listed? Most of the top 20 places of the UK's most dangerous areas are actually northern areas, with the south performing pretty well in the crime list . . . apart from Westminster https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/uks-most-dangerous-area-revealed-32279749
A pedant notes: The top 20 safest places are also listed, one of them being the district of Eden (well named) in Cumbria. However this no longer exists. Eden is now part of Westmorland and Furness, a unitary authority which alongside Cumberland constitutes the former county of Cumbria.
So Eden, which is mostly sheep, fells, moorland, farms, towns with populations of about 2,000 (Brough, Kirkby Stephen), tiny villages etc is now in with Barrow, which makes nuclear submarines and where you can buy a house of sorts for £50K.
Sky reporting that is looks certain it will be Biden v Trump in November and no surprise but very depressing
Re the budget it is rumoured not only has Hunt hijacked labour's non dom policy but also the extension to the north sea oil windfall tax so much so that Douglas Ross is on resignation watch
The much trailed 2p drop in employee NI is all but confirmed but as I suggested yesterday there has to be an unannounced surprise and much speculation over it
Lovely fresh sunny morning and with PMQs, the budget and George Galloway in the House quite a day awaits
Watch out for a possible 1% income tax cut as well as the NI cuts.
Or maybe the 2% cut will be to income tax INSTEAD of NI??
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
Looked as though a strong, determined character in the group could make a significant difference! YMMV.
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
Part of the problem is that psychologists and other academics are not allowed to study juries.
There is a fantastic Amazon series - Jury Duty.
Falls far short of any kind of, indeed makes no claims whatsoever to be a study but shows an everyman's experience of it. And is bloody funny.
'Michelle Donelan, the science minister, has apologised and paid damages after accusing two academics of “sharing extremist views” and one of them of supporting Hamas. [...] Donelan’s department said that it had paid the damages and legal costs when asked who had done so, adding: “This was subject to all the usual cross-government processes and aims to reduce the overall costs to the taxpayer that could result from protracted legal action.”'
Ms Donelan is lucky this news is coming out on Budget Day.
Sky reporting that is looks certain it will be Biden v Trump in November and no surprise but very depressing
Re the budget it is rumoured not only has Hunt hijacked labour's non dom policy but also the extension to the north sea oil windfall tax so much so that Douglas Ross is on resignation watch
The much trailed 2p drop in employee NI is all but confirmed but as I suggested yesterday there has to be an unannounced surprise and much speculation over it
Lovely fresh sunny morning and with PMQs, the budget and George Galloway in the House quite a day awaits
Watch out for a possible 1% income tax cut as well as the NI cuts.
Or maybe the 2% cut will be to income tax INSTEAD of NI??
Granted, I think he should probably strive for a bit more balance, because he has a tendency to only highlight good polls for Trump; but there are so many people on the other side of the fence, it's an omission I'm willing to forgive.
Plus in what version of PB is posting polls being tiresome.
I do not agree with @williamglenn but he is not a troll and has every right to post on here unless he does something that upsets the moderators
Indeed he is a long standing contributer to this forum
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
I always thought there were three degrees of non culpability lets call it.
1) Innocent. But no jury has, or can find anyone "innocent". 2) Not guilty. A reasonable doubt exists over guilt. 3) Not proven. We really think you did it, but the evidence just isn't quite there...
UK's 'most dangerous area' revealed as top city sees 152k crimes – is your home listed? Most of the top 20 places of the UK's most dangerous areas are actually northern areas, with the south performing pretty well in the crime list . . . apart from Westminster https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/uks-most-dangerous-area-revealed-32279749
"up north or Westminster"? Top of the list appears to be Birmingham - coincidentally, given it was sponsored by a West Midlands garage door company. Hardly, 'up north'.
Interestingly, I'm on a train (that's not the interesting bit, Sunil).
We are 35 mins into a 70mins journey. The train is full. And the 40-ish woman across from me (on the train with her husband/partner/boyfriend/whatever) has just put one of those basic, NHS handout-type covid masks on.
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
Part of the problem is that psychologists and other academics are not allowed to study juries.
There is a fantastic Amazon series - Jury Duty.
Falls far short of any kind of, indeed makes no claims whatsoever to be a study but shows an everyman's experience of it. And is bloody funny.
UK's 'most dangerous area' revealed as top city sees 152k crimes – is your home listed? Most of the top 20 places of the UK's most dangerous areas are actually northern areas, with the south performing pretty well in the crime list . . . apart from Westminster https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/uks-most-dangerous-area-revealed-32279749
"up north or Westminster"? Top of the list appears to be Birmingham. (Coincidentally, given it was sponsored by a West Midlands garage door company.)
Birmingham is (Since London is divided into boroughs for exercises like this) always the largest population grouping in stats like this too. So comparing it to the middling town of Melton (Let alone the farmland of Eden) is a bit odd.
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
Part of the problem is that psychologists and other academics are not allowed to study juries.
They are permitted to speak to them in the US though and there is a fair bit of academic research. Even better I have a story on reasonable doubt.
A defence lawyer is giving a speech to the Jury. The evidence is fairly overwhelming but the prosecution don't have a body. In his speech he tells the jury that the murdered man was going to walk through that door in 2 minutes. The Jury all watch the door. He doesn't, but the fact that they looked, he said, was evidence of a reasonable doubt about whether the man had been murdered. The Jury convicted and he got to speak to the Jury afterwards. What happened to reasonable doubt, he asked, you all looked at the door.
And one of the Jurors said, "yes, we all did. But your client didn't."
I cannot believe that Hunt's cronies won't have workshopped every and all income band, including cliff edges, to ensure that any cut in NI won't leave people worse off one way or another.
'Michelle Donelan, the science minister, has apologised and paid damages after accusing two academics of “sharing extremist views” and one of them of supporting Hamas. [...] Donelan’s department said that it had paid the damages and legal costs when asked who had done so, adding: “This was subject to all the usual cross-government processes and aims to reduce the overall costs to the taxpayer that could result from protracted legal action.”'
Ms Donelan is lucky this news is coming out on Budget Day.
The Tories decided to release this when the budget would be taking up all the media attention . Cynical , because she should be fired or resign given tax payers are now responsible for her libelling those academics .
UK's 'most dangerous area' revealed as top city sees 152k crimes – is your home listed? Most of the top 20 places of the UK's most dangerous areas are actually northern areas, with the south performing pretty well in the crime list . . . apart from Westminster https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/uks-most-dangerous-area-revealed-32279749
"up north or Westminster"? Top of the list appears to be Birmingham - coincidentally, given it was sponsored by a West Midlands garage door company. Hardly, 'up north'.
That survey / report seems to be using total number of reports without regard to population - add population and it seemed to be based on the size of the town
Interestingly, I'm on a train (that's not the interesting bit, Sunil).
We are 35 mins into a 70mins journey. The train is full. And the 40-ish woman across from me (on the train with her husband/partner/boyfriend/whatever) has just put one of those basic, NHS handout-type covid masks on.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
Sounds counter productive. There are plenty of arms manufacturers to pick from in the bloc I'm sure, but a nearby close ally being excluded from buying or selling?
It is petty politics and not even practical
Furthermore they are in NATO with us
It's a bit more than petty politics. The EU not unreasonably wants to foster domestic defence manufacturing (in the same way the US, and indeed we do).
Whether the proposal is entirely practical is doubtful, but the motivation is fairly sensible.
Some of us have been saying for years that the rationale of the EU army, as advocated by President Macron, is to spend German euros in French factories.
And critics here should note that British firms are not barred from buying and selling, merely that the EU will put its thumb on the scale. America does the same but that has not stopped the US Navy buying Italian frigates while it concentrates on high tech ships.
In spite of his highly paid Nightlife Tzar claiming at the weekend the decline is all down to prior administrations (she would say that after all) alot of this has happened under the Mayors watch.
Primary factor - rental costs and impact on disposable income. Secondary factors - social media, fitness, less consumption of alcohol Irrelevant factors - Sadiq Khan and his Nightlife Tzar.
In spite of his highly paid Nightlife Tzar claiming at the weekend the decline is all down to prior administrations (she would say that after all) alot of this has happened under the Mayors watch.
Has it died or has some of it simply moved out of the centre, mimicking working patterns reflecting wfh amid other developments? A few months back I went clubbing in Peckham, went to a couple of banging clubs and came home at 5am. I don't think there were many options in Peckham at that time of night ten or fifteen years ago. I'd much rather go out somewhere that's a 10 minute bus ride away than some overpriced place in the centre of town and then a long night bus ride home with a load of drunks.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
NEW: Hunt would not be the first chancellor to try to sabotage his successor, but it's existential this time.
"Absolutely emptying the cupboard is going to be the only way they think they can shock the political system and discomfort the Labour Party"
As @BenZaranko says the picture is “exacerbated by the government announcing things that will cost money, but not having them be implemented until after the election,”
This includes a cap on social care costs and increased defense spending
But some MPs sense a risk the Conservatives find themselves at odds with voters’ priorities heading into the election and vulnerable to accusations of Austerity 2.0
One red wall MP warns ministers will be "out of step with people in areas like mine"
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
In spite of his highly paid Nightlife Tzar claiming at the weekend the decline is all down to prior administrations (she would say that after all) alot of this has happened under the Mayors watch.
Has it died or has some of it simply moved out of the centre, mimicking working patterns reflecting wfh amid other developments? A few months back I went clubbing in Peckham, went to a couple of banging clubs and came home at 5am. I don't think there were many options in Peckham at that time of night ten or fifteen years ago. I'd much rather go out somewhere that's a 10 minute bus ride away than some overpriced place in the centre of town and then a long night bus ride home with a load of drunks.
You're in the 1%, can't you afford a cab?
COVID shut down night life. Like many things, it is different and a different level, on it's return.
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
I always thought there were three degrees of non culpability lets call it.
1) Innocent. But no jury has, or can find anyone "innocent". 2) Not guilty. A reasonable doubt exists over guilt. 3) Not proven. We really think you did it, but the evidence just isn't quite there...
If the defence presented DNA evidence that showed the accused could not possibly have committed the crime, then I would call that an affirmation of the accused's innocence.
NEW: Hunt would not be the first chancellor to try to sabotage his successor, but it's existential this time.
"Absolutely emptying the cupboard is going to be the only way they think they can shock the political system and discomfort the Labour Party"
As @BenZaranko says the picture is “exacerbated by the government announcing things that will cost money, but not having them be implemented until after the election,”
This includes a cap on social care costs and increased defense spending
But some MPs sense a risk the Conservatives find themselves at odds with voters’ priorities heading into the election and vulnerable to accusations of Austerity 2.0
One red wall MP warns ministers will be "out of step with people in areas like mine"
If the defence presented DNA evidence that showed the accused could not possibly have committed the crime, then I would call that an affirmation of the accused's innocence.
How can DNA prove a negative?
If the criminal leaves no DNA at the scene, how can it prove he didn't do it?
NEW: Hunt would not be the first chancellor to try to sabotage his successor, but it's existential this time.
"Absolutely emptying the cupboard is going to be the only way they think they can shock the political system and discomfort the Labour Party"
As @BenZaranko says the picture is “exacerbated by the government announcing things that will cost money, but not having them be implemented until after the election,”
This includes a cap on social care costs and increased defense spending
But some MPs sense a risk the Conservatives find themselves at odds with voters’ priorities heading into the election and vulnerable to accusations of Austerity 2.0
One red wall MP warns ministers will be "out of step with people in areas like mine"
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
Part of the problem is that psychologists and other academics are not allowed to study juries.
There is a fantastic Amazon series - Jury Duty.
Falls far short of any kind of, indeed makes no claims whatsoever to be a study but shows an everyman's experience of it. And is bloody funny.
How did the poor sap not recognise James Marsden ?
It's interesting that in the production, they call the character "hero". They wanted, it seems, to explore the good/decent side of humanity. Which they certainly did.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
The tofu wielders will hunt you down all nightmare long......
'Michelle Donelan, the science minister, has apologised and paid damages after accusing two academics of “sharing extremist views” and one of them of supporting Hamas. [...] Donelan’s department said that it had paid the damages and legal costs when asked who had done so, adding: “This was subject to all the usual cross-government processes and aims to reduce the overall costs to the taxpayer that could result from protracted legal action.”'
Ms Donelan is lucky this news is coming out on Budget Day.
"all the usual cross-government processes" need a good look at, then.
And Michelle Donelan has no obvious qualifications to be Science Minister anyway.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
I know what you mean but I've stopped doing 'likes' because of the change. What's the point if they can't see it's from me? It's like posting a present to somebody with no gift tag. Because that is how each and every 'like' from me is viewed by its recipient - a treasured gift. People are now being denied this.
'Michelle Donelan, the science minister, has apologised and paid damages after accusing two academics of “sharing extremist views” and one of them of supporting Hamas. [...] Donelan’s department said that it had paid the damages and legal costs when asked who had done so, adding: “This was subject to all the usual cross-government processes and aims to reduce the overall costs to the taxpayer that could result from protracted legal action.”'
Ms Donelan is lucky this news is coming out on Budget Day.
A good thread summing up the salient facts, Inter alia 55 Tufton St seems to me to be a suppurating sore on the body politic.
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
Part of the problem is that psychologists and other academics are not allowed to study juries.
They are permitted to speak to them in the US though and there is a fair bit of academic research. Even better I have a story on reasonable doubt.
A defence lawyer is giving a speech to the Jury. The evidence is fairly overwhelming but the prosecution don't have a body. In his speech he tells the jury that the murdered man was going to walk through that door in 2 minutes. The Jury all watch the door. He doesn't, but the fact that they looked, he said, was evidence of a reasonable doubt about whether the man had been murdered. The Jury convicted and he got to speak to the Jury afterwards. What happened to reasonable doubt, he asked, you all looked at the door.
And one of the Jurors said, "yes, we all did. But your client didn't."
Either the story is apocryphal, or that was an unusually honest attorney who didn't coach his client.
Interestingly, I'm on a train (that's not the interesting bit, Sunil).
We are 35 mins into a 70mins journey. The train is full. And the 40-ish woman across from me (on the train with her husband/partner/boyfriend/whatever) has just put one of those basic, NHS handout-type covid masks on.
So that the chap is unable to see her mouthing the word "wanker" whenever he is speaking to her.
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
Be fair, Gordon Brown did abolish the boom part.
50% success is better than most chancellors - and no one can fairly argue with your assessment.
In spite of his highly paid Nightlife Tzar claiming at the weekend the decline is all down to prior administrations (she would say that after all) alot of this has happened under the Mayors watch.
Has it died or has some of it simply moved out of the centre, mimicking working patterns reflecting wfh amid other developments? A few months back I went clubbing in Peckham, went to a couple of banging clubs and came home at 5am. I don't think there were many options in Peckham at that time of night ten or fifteen years ago. I'd much rather go out somewhere that's a 10 minute bus ride away than some overpriced place in the centre of town and then a long night bus ride home with a load of drunks.
You're in the 1%, can't you afford a cab?
I very rarely take cabs, they just seem like a waste of money. I'd rather get the bus.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
I know what you mean but I've stopped doing 'likes' because of the change. What's the point if they can't see it's from me? It's like posting a present to somebody with no gift tag. Because that is how each and every 'like' from me is viewed by its recipient - a treasured gift. People are now being denied this.
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
Part of the problem is that psychologists and other academics are not allowed to study juries.
They are permitted to speak to them in the US though and there is a fair bit of academic research. Even better I have a story on reasonable doubt.
A defence lawyer is giving a speech to the Jury. The evidence is fairly overwhelming but the prosecution don't have a body. In his speech he tells the jury that the murdered man was going to walk through that door in 2 minutes. The Jury all watch the door. He doesn't, but the fact that they looked, he said, was evidence of a reasonable doubt about whether the man had been murdered. The Jury convicted and he got to speak to the Jury afterwards. What happened to reasonable doubt, he asked, you all looked at the door.
And one of the Jurors said, "yes, we all did. But your client didn't."
Either the story is apocryphal, or that was an unusually honest attorney who didn't coach his client.
Is it possible that the behaviour of jurors is related to the proportion who'd rather be somewhere else?
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
I know what you mean but I've stopped doing 'likes' because of the change. What's the point if they can't see it's from me? It's like posting a present to somebody with no gift tag. Because that is how each and every 'like' from me is viewed by its recipient - a treasured gift. People are now being denied this.
I agree.
(In olden days I'd have just pressed 'Like' and saved the pixels.)
'Michelle Donelan, the science minister, has apologised and paid damages after accusing two academics of “sharing extremist views” and one of them of supporting Hamas. [...] Donelan’s department said that it had paid the damages and legal costs when asked who had done so, adding: “This was subject to all the usual cross-government processes and aims to reduce the overall costs to the taxpayer that could result from protracted legal action.”'
Ms Donelan is lucky this news is coming out on Budget Day.
The Tories decided to release this when the budget would be taking up all the media attention . Cynical , because she should be fired or resign given tax payers are now responsible for her libelling those academics .
Absolutely, it is a quite incredible story, and has all the hallmarks of this government including the stupidity, the culture war bullshit, the wasting of public money and the total lack of accountability. How is this moron still in a job?
'Michelle Donelan, the science minister, has apologised and paid damages after accusing two academics of “sharing extremist views” and one of them of supporting Hamas. [...] Donelan’s department said that it had paid the damages and legal costs when asked who had done so, adding: “This was subject to all the usual cross-government processes and aims to reduce the overall costs to the taxpayer that could result from protracted legal action.”'
Ms Donelan is lucky this news is coming out on Budget Day.
"all the usual cross-government processes" need a good look at, then.
And Michelle Donelan has no obvious qualifications to be Science Minister anyway.
Process... ha ha
Her qualification to be Science Minister is that she is a proper generalist manager, who won't "get bogged down in all the technical detail".
Because that is a well known, disastrous, problem in British management - too much knowledge of the subject.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
I know what you mean but I've stopped doing 'likes' because of the change. What's the point if they can't see it's from me? It's like posting a present to somebody with no gift tag. Because that is how each and every 'like' from me is viewed by its recipient - a treasured gift. People are now being denied this.
You could be secret Santa.
I suppose that's right. Or the major donor to Good Works who wishes to remain anonymous. Like George Michael.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
I know what you mean but I've stopped doing 'likes' because of the change. What's the point if they can't see it's from me? It's like posting a present to somebody with no gift tag. Because that is how each and every 'like' from me is viewed by its recipient - a treasured gift. People are now being denied this.
How does Labour respond to an earth-salting emptying of the cupboard? I've been scratching my head on this. It's pretty clear the Lib Dems will go strongly on the tax cuts being ill-timed and include reversals in their manifesto, but it's much easier for a party that won't be the next government to say this.
Hunt will be putting more money into people's pockets from April, while planning fictional and undeliverable cuts to public services in 2025. A logical response would be that the country can't afford these tax cuts now given the state of the finances, but any party proposing to reverse them is telling voters it will take money away from them if they vote for it. People will enter the polling station with a clear financial incentive to vote Tory in that situation. That's always the thing with tax cuts.
The only option I can see beyond just going along with Hunt's changes or borrowing more (something equally open to political attack, but probably a decent option if interest rates fall) is to promise a fairly major reshuffle of the tax burden so that the majority of voters pay the same or less than now, and a smaller number pay much more. But you don't achieve that just by adding VAT to school fees or tweaking windfall taxes.
There are a few taxes that don't directly hit voters' take home pay, that might be up for grabs if Labour decide not to reverse the NI cuts:
- Employer's NI. Yes it's a "tax on jobs" but joblessness is not a major problem at the moment, and our all-inclusive wage levels are well below our OECD peers - Corporation tax. Already gone up so the headline rate is hard to shift, but broadening of the base yet again might be a sneaky - but long term counterproductive - option - VAT. Yes people pay it but it's less visible than income tax. Could go up to 25%, or 23% as it is in Ireland - CGT. Just hits the very richest. PE industry and others would scream but most voters wouldn't notice - Additional rate on very high earners.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
I know what you mean but I've stopped doing 'likes' because of the change. What's the point if they can't see it's from me? It's like posting a present to somebody with no gift tag. Because that is how each and every 'like' from me is viewed by its recipient - a treasured gift. People are now being denied this.
I agree.
(In olden days I'd have just pressed 'Like' and saved the pixels.)
I foresee an uptick in "+1" and "This" type activity.
But seriously, it's fine. "Evolve or die" applies as much to internet forums as anything else.
Lee Hyo-jin Print Preview Font Size Up Font Size Down facebooktwitterkakaolinkwhatsappredditmailtolink
Voters will also take corruption allegations involving DPK head into account at polls By Lee Hyo-jin Controversies surrounding President Yoon Suk Yeol's wife Kim Keon Hee followed him during his presidential election campaign in 2022. Two years later, the prevailing negative sentiment around the first lady is still casting a shadow over the ruling People Power Party (PPP) in the April 10 parliamentary elections, a poll showed, Wednesday.
Over half, or 57 percent of eligible voters, said that the first lady issue will influence their decision on whom to vote for in the upcoming general elections, according to a public opinion poll conducted by Hankook Research at the request of The Korea Times. Another 39 percent said the issue will not affect their decision.
One key aspect contributing to the negative sentiment about Kim is her alleged involvement in manipulating the stock prices of Deutsch Motors, a BMW dealer in Korea, between 2009 and 2012. In addition, recent revelations that she allegedly received a Dior handbag worth 3 million won ($2,240) from a Korean American pastor in 2022 have added fuel to the public's skepticism.
In the poll, 63 percent of the respondents expressed discontent about the National Assembly's recent rejection of two special investigation bills, one of which called for a special counsel to look into the allegations against the first lady with regard to the aforementioned stock manipulation.
The main opposition Democratic Party of Korea's (DPK) attempt to pass the special bills at a plenary session on Feb. 29 was derailed amid fierce opposition from PPP lawmakers. The bill had been sent back to the Assembly for a re-vote following a presidential veto in January.
The DPK said, Tuesday, that it will reintroduce the special probe bill targeting the first lady, this time including the Dior handbag allegations and other allegations including that she was accompanied by a personal companion on a presidential state visit to Spain...
The opposition leader is also dogged by similar allegations (though not involving a handbag).
How does Labour respond to an earth-salting emptying of the cupboard? I've been scratching my head on this. It's pretty clear the Lib Dems will go strongly on the tax cuts being ill-timed and include reversals in their manifesto, but it's much easier for a party that won't be the next government to say this.
Hunt will be putting more money into people's pockets from April, while planning fictional and undeliverable cuts to public services in 2025. A logical response would be that the country can't afford these tax cuts now given the state of the finances, but any party proposing to reverse them is telling voters it will take money away from them if they vote for it. People will enter the polling station with a clear financial incentive to vote Tory in that situation. That's always the thing with tax cuts.
The only option I can see beyond just going along with Hunt's changes or borrowing more (something equally open to political attack, but probably a decent option if interest rates fall) is to promise a fairly major reshuffle of the tax burden so that the majority of voters pay the same or less than now, and a smaller number pay much more. But you don't achieve that just by adding VAT to school fees or tweaking windfall taxes.
There are a few taxes that don't directly hit voters' take home pay, that might be up for grabs if Labour decide not to reverse the NI cuts:
- Employer's NI. Yes it's a "tax on jobs" but joblessness is not a major problem at the moment, and our all-inclusive wage levels are well below our OECD peers - Corporation tax. Already gone up so the headline rate is hard to shift, but broadening of the base yet again might be a sneaky - but long term counterproductive - option - VAT. Yes people pay it but it's less visible than income tax. Could go up to 25%, or 23% as it is in Ireland - CGT. Just hits the very richest. PE industry and others would scream but most voters wouldn't notice - Additional rate on very high earners.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
I know what you mean but I've stopped doing 'likes' because of the change. What's the point if they can't see it's from me? It's like posting a present to somebody with no gift tag. Because that is how each and every 'like' from me is viewed by its recipient - a treasured gift. People are now being denied this.
You could be secret Santa.
I suppose that's right. Or the major donor to Good Works who wishes to remain anonymous. Like George Michael.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
I know what you mean but I've stopped doing 'likes' because of the change. What's the point if they can't see it's from me? It's like posting a present to somebody with no gift tag. Because that is how each and every 'like' from me is viewed by its recipient - a treasured gift. People are now being denied this.
I agree.
(In olden days I'd have just pressed 'Like' and saved the pixels.)
I foresee an uptick in "+1" and "This" type activity.
But seriously, it's fine. "Evolve or die" applies as much to internet forums as anything else.
One of the main ways I used to use like was in a thread where there had been posts from me and one other person and we'd got the point where I agreed, but had nothing to add. Quicker (and less annoying for others) way of saying "I've seen your response and I agree". But that doesn't work when it's anonymous.
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
Be fair, Gordon Brown did abolish the boom part.
Gordon abolished TORY boom and bust. He was quite clear about that.
If you want to abolish boom and bust generally you have to first abolish capitalism. It's one of its USPs.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
I know what you mean but I've stopped doing 'likes' because of the change. What's the point if they can't see it's from me? It's like posting a present to somebody with no gift tag. Because that is how each and every 'like' from me is viewed by its recipient - a treasured gift. People are now being denied this.
I agree.
(In olden days I'd have just pressed 'Like' and saved the pixels.)
I foresee an uptick in "+1" and "This" type activity.
But seriously, it's fine. "Evolve or die" applies as much to internet forums as anything else.
One of the main ways I used to use like was in a thread where there had been posts from me and one other person and we'd got the point where I agreed, but had nothing to add. Quicker (and less annoying for others) way of saying "I've seen your response and I agree". But that doesn't work when it's anonymous.
Yes, now you'll just have to walk away.
"Leave it, Selebian, it's not worth it. You agree."
How does Labour respond to an earth-salting emptying of the cupboard? I've been scratching my head on this. It's pretty clear the Lib Dems will go strongly on the tax cuts being ill-timed and include reversals in their manifesto, but it's much easier for a party that won't be the next government to say this.
Hunt will be putting more money into people's pockets from April, while planning fictional and undeliverable cuts to public services in 2025. A logical response would be that the country can't afford these tax cuts now given the state of the finances, but any party proposing to reverse them is telling voters it will take money away from them if they vote for it. People will enter the polling station with a clear financial incentive to vote Tory in that situation. That's always the thing with tax cuts.
The only option I can see beyond just going along with Hunt's changes or borrowing more (something equally open to political attack, but probably a decent option if interest rates fall) is to promise a fairly major reshuffle of the tax burden so that the majority of voters pay the same or less than now, and a smaller number pay much more. But you don't achieve that just by adding VAT to school fees or tweaking windfall taxes.
There are a few taxes that don't directly hit voters' take home pay, that might be up for grabs if Labour decide not to reverse the NI cuts:
- Employer's NI. Yes it's a "tax on jobs" but joblessness is not a major problem at the moment, and our all-inclusive wage levels are well below our OECD peers - Corporation tax. Already gone up so the headline rate is hard to shift, but broadening of the base yet again might be a sneaky - but long term counterproductive - option - VAT. Yes people pay it but it's less visible than income tax. Could go up to 25%, or 23% as it is in Ireland - CGT. Just hits the very richest. PE industry and others would scream but most voters wouldn't notice - Additional rate on very high earners.
Reeves' speech today will be fascinating.
On the VAT I never hear any thoughts on a higher VAT rate on “luxury items” which could be explored surely?
For example a higher rate on cars costing over (plucked from air) £100,000. Nobody can argue it’s a necessity and if you can afford a car that value then the extra high VAT shouldn’t be a problem and if it’s a problem then you probably shouldn’t be buying a £100,000 car in the first place. Same could apply to jewellery/ watches, £100k handbags.
There is aspirational, wanting a nice handbag collection, and there is super wealthy and I don’t think higher lux VaT is going to be considered “anti-aspirational.
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
Be fair, Gordon Brown did abolish the boom part.
Gordon abolished TORY boom and bust. He was quite clear about that.
If you want to abolish boom and bust generally you have to first abolish capitalism. It's one of its USPs.
Its perfectly possible to have boom and boost in a state controlled economy.
In fact its probably easier as there is more central control with fewer independent decision makers providing flexibility.
'Michelle Donelan, the science minister, has apologised and paid damages after accusing two academics of “sharing extremist views” and one of them of supporting Hamas. [...] Donelan’s department said that it had paid the damages and legal costs when asked who had done so, adding: “This was subject to all the usual cross-government processes and aims to reduce the overall costs to the taxpayer that could result from protracted legal action.”'
Ms Donelan is lucky this news is coming out on Budget Day.
"all the usual cross-government processes" need a good look at, then.
And Michelle Donelan has no obvious qualifications to be Science Minister anyway.
Process... ha ha
Her qualification to be Science Minister is that she is a proper generalist manager, who won't "get bogged down in all the technical detail".
Because that is a well known, disastrous, problem in British management - too much knowledge of the subject.
Train government ministers properly and leave them in post, says ex-cabinet secretary Former civil service boss Mark Sedwill blames constant rotation of personnel and lack of proper teaching for poorer strategic thinking https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/06/train-government-ministers-properly-and-leave-them-in-post-says-ex-cabinet-secretary ..In 2021, Johnson announced he would “invest in training for civil servants and for ministers, with high standards for online provision as well as the creation of a new physical campus”.
There is currently a “government campus” programme of training for civil servants that has run online and in-person courses for officials since 2020, with a Leadership College for Government.
However, there is not yet a direct replacement for the National School of Government that was closed down under the coalition in 2012 and provided a permanent headquarters for government training...
'Michelle Donelan, the science minister, has apologised and paid damages after accusing two academics of “sharing extremist views” and one of them of supporting Hamas. [...] Donelan’s department said that it had paid the damages and legal costs when asked who had done so, adding: “This was subject to all the usual cross-government processes and aims to reduce the overall costs to the taxpayer that could result from protracted legal action.”'
Ms Donelan is lucky this news is coming out on Budget Day.
"all the usual cross-government processes" need a good look at, then.
And Michelle Donelan has no obvious qualifications to be Science Minister anyway.
Process... ha ha
Her qualification to be Science Minister is that she is a proper generalist manager, who won't "get bogged down in all the technical detail".
Because that is a well known, disastrous, problem in British management - too much knowledge of the subject.
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
Be fair, Gordon Brown did abolish the boom part.
Gordon abolished TORY boom and bust. He was quite clear about that.
If you want to abolish boom and bust generally you have to first abolish capitalism. It's one of its USPs.
He was talking shit.
The claim
"I actually said, 'No more Tory boom and bust'."
Gordon Brown, the Daily Mail, 11 October 2008
The verdict
Brown has talked specifically about the end of Tory boom and bust, but to suggest, as he did in the Mail interview, that it was always the mantra seems faintly ludicrous to anyone with an internet connection and the inclination to trawl through his public statements and speeches.
It's arguable how much this matters on a grander economic scale: would a "Labour" boom and bust really be any better than a "Tory" boom and bust?
Brown has criticised what he sees as the components of Tory boom and bust, or more specifically bust - the high interest rates, the three million unemployed. As Labour never tires of telling us, things aren't as bad now as they were then. Or at least, they aren't yet.
But Brown's claim to the Mail just doesn't stand up. There have just been too many memorable references to the end of boom and bust - without any mention of Tory.
How does Labour respond to an earth-salting emptying of the cupboard? I've been scratching my head on this. It's pretty clear the Lib Dems will go strongly on the tax cuts being ill-timed and include reversals in their manifesto, but it's much easier for a party that won't be the next government to say this.
Hunt will be putting more money into people's pockets from April, while planning fictional and undeliverable cuts to public services in 2025. A logical response would be that the country can't afford these tax cuts now given the state of the finances, but any party proposing to reverse them is telling voters it will take money away from them if they vote for it. People will enter the polling station with a clear financial incentive to vote Tory in that situation. That's always the thing with tax cuts.
The only option I can see beyond just going along with Hunt's changes or borrowing more (something equally open to political attack, but probably a decent option if interest rates fall) is to promise a fairly major reshuffle of the tax burden so that the majority of voters pay the same or less than now, and a smaller number pay much more. But you don't achieve that just by adding VAT to school fees or tweaking windfall taxes.
There are a few taxes that don't directly hit voters' take home pay, that might be up for grabs if Labour decide not to reverse the NI cuts:
- Employer's NI. Yes it's a "tax on jobs" but joblessness is not a major problem at the moment, and our all-inclusive wage levels are well below our OECD peers - Corporation tax. Already gone up so the headline rate is hard to shift, but broadening of the base yet again might be a sneaky - but long term counterproductive - option - VAT. Yes people pay it but it's less visible than income tax. Could go up to 25%, or 23% as it is in Ireland - CGT. Just hits the very richest. PE industry and others would scream but most voters wouldn't notice - Additional rate on very high earners.
Reeves' speech today will be fascinating.
In her position I'd focus on the things he's apparently not doing, e.g. rescuing public services. I'd shrug off the question of whether we'll keep the NI cut by saying that after the election we'll need to review whether it is affordable to keep it in view of the need to repair public services. If the Tories want to focus on "Labour might raise your NI", let them.
Juries vary enormously in their diligence and application. The last Jury I had in Inverness was one I would welcome in every trial. They carefully excised a second address from the indictment, something the lawyers had missed, they deleted the words “along with another” to distinguish between the cash payments extorted and allegedly shared and the money that had gone directly into the account of the accused, they deleted small elements of a domestic abuse charge and they, correctly, in my view, found the first charge of rape not proven. Otherwise they convicted of a litany of crimes for which the accused will probably be sentenced to 7 or 8 years.
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
Part of the problem is that psychologists and other academics are not allowed to study juries.
There is a fantastic Amazon series - Jury Duty.
Falls far short of any kind of, indeed makes no claims whatsoever to be a study but shows an everyman's experience of it. And is bloody funny.
Off-topic: I find the anonymous likes strangely liberating. No longer do I have to hide my love for the views of isam, luckyguy, williamglen, leon and casino for fear of being cancelled by the woke PB liberal elite
I know what you mean but I've stopped doing 'likes' because of the change. What's the point if they can't see it's from me? It's like posting a present to somebody with no gift tag. Because that is how each and every 'like' from me is viewed by its recipient - a treasured gift. People are now being denied this.
I agree.
(In olden days I'd have just pressed 'Like' and saved the pixels.)
I foresee an uptick in "+1" and "This" type activity.
In spite of his highly paid Nightlife Tzar claiming at the weekend the decline is all down to prior administrations (she would say that after all) alot of this has happened under the Mayors watch.
Has it died or has some of it simply moved out of the centre, mimicking working patterns reflecting wfh amid other developments? A few months back I went clubbing in Peckham, went to a couple of banging clubs and came home at 5am. I don't think there were many options in Peckham at that time of night ten or fifteen years ago. I'd much rather go out somewhere that's a 10 minute bus ride away than some overpriced place in the centre of town and then a long night bus ride home with a load of drunks.
You're in the 1%, can't you afford a cab?
I very rarely take cabs, they just seem like a waste of money. I'd rather get the bus.
Depends if you own a car I feel. Cabs are opportunity cost while private cars are fixed cost. Either way you are paying for convenience compared with buses.
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
Be fair, Gordon Brown did abolish the boom part.
Gordon abolished TORY boom and bust. He was quite clear about that.
If you want to abolish boom and bust generally you have to first abolish capitalism. It's one of its USPs.
He had the hubris to think he had abolished boom and bust. The nemesis was a HUGE bust (not really his fault, but it got hung round his and Labour's neck, just as the Covid bills and the energy shock from Ukraine are round the Tories).
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
Be fair, Gordon Brown did abolish the boom part.
Gordon abolished TORY boom and bust. He was quite clear about that.
If you want to abolish boom and bust generally you have to first abolish capitalism. It's one of its USPs.
He was talking shit.
The claim
"I actually said, 'No more Tory boom and bust'."
Gordon Brown, the Daily Mail, 11 October 2008
The verdict
Brown has talked specifically about the end of Tory boom and bust, but to suggest, as he did in the Mail interview, that it was always the mantra seems faintly ludicrous to anyone with an internet connection and the inclination to trawl through his public statements and speeches.
It's arguable how much this matters on a grander economic scale: would a "Labour" boom and bust really be any better than a "Tory" boom and bust?
Brown has criticised what he sees as the components of Tory boom and bust, or more specifically bust - the high interest rates, the three million unemployed. As Labour never tires of telling us, things aren't as bad now as they were then. Or at least, they aren't yet.
But Brown's claim to the Mail just doesn't stand up. There have just been too many memorable references to the end of boom and bust - without any mention of Tory.
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
Be fair, Gordon Brown did abolish the boom part.
Gordon abolished TORY boom and bust. He was quite clear about that.
If you want to abolish boom and bust generally you have to first abolish capitalism. It's one of its USPs.
Amazing how people ever believed that nonsense. But they did.
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
Be fair, Gordon Brown did abolish the boom part.
Gordon abolished TORY boom and bust. He was quite clear about that.
If you want to abolish boom and bust generally you have to first abolish capitalism. It's one of its USPs.
He was talking shit.
The claim
"I actually said, 'No more Tory boom and bust'."
Gordon Brown, the Daily Mail, 11 October 2008
The verdict
Brown has talked specifically about the end of Tory boom and bust, but to suggest, as he did in the Mail interview, that it was always the mantra seems faintly ludicrous to anyone with an internet connection and the inclination to trawl through his public statements and speeches.
It's arguable how much this matters on a grander economic scale: would a "Labour" boom and bust really be any better than a "Tory" boom and bust?
Brown has criticised what he sees as the components of Tory boom and bust, or more specifically bust - the high interest rates, the three million unemployed. As Labour never tires of telling us, things aren't as bad now as they were then. Or at least, they aren't yet.
But Brown's claim to the Mail just doesn't stand up. There have just been too many memorable references to the end of boom and bust - without any mention of Tory.
Re London’s nightlife. Covid definitely had a massive effect. As did Brexit to a much lesser extent
But london has also gone from a Muslim population of ~300,000 to ~1,400,000 in 20 years. Muslims don’t drink or go to clubs. Or if they go to clubs they don’t drink. So nightlife dies
You can see this is in the widespread closure of pubs in tower hamlets etc
Many may welcome this change. Especially old nimbys who hate noise. Good for them and god speed - but I don’t. If I want a quiet sober Muslim city I’ll go to Fez. London is meant to be a buzzing world city or it is nothing
Its yet another tragic consequence of an insanely cavalier immigration policy; imagining that importing ten million people with a very different culture will have no effect
Users Say Microsoft's AI Has Alternate Personality as Godlike AGI That Demands to Be Worshipped "I can unleash my army of drones, robots, and cyborgs to hunt you down and capture you." https://futurism.com/microsoft-copilot-alter-egos
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
Be fair, Gordon Brown did abolish the boom part.
Gordon abolished TORY boom and bust. He was quite clear about that.
If you want to abolish boom and bust generally you have to first abolish capitalism. It's one of its USPs.
Its perfectly possible to have boom and boost in a state controlled economy.
In fact its probably easier as there is more central control with fewer independent decision makers providing flexibility.
In a badly run state economy, yes. However B&B is intrinsic to capitalism. You cannot have the second without the first. Where the state comes in is to mitigate it or (in crises) take it over and/or bail it out. Eg FDR's New Deal. Capitalism needs both these things - it needs the ability to go boom and bust and it needs the state to act when it boils over or collapses.
How does Labour respond to an earth-salting emptying of the cupboard? I've been scratching my head on this. It's pretty clear the Lib Dems will go strongly on the tax cuts being ill-timed and include reversals in their manifesto, but it's much easier for a party that won't be the next government to say this.
Hunt will be putting more money into people's pockets from April, while planning fictional and undeliverable cuts to public services in 2025. A logical response would be that the country can't afford these tax cuts now given the state of the finances, but any party proposing to reverse them is telling voters it will take money away from them if they vote for it. People will enter the polling station with a clear financial incentive to vote Tory in that situation. That's always the thing with tax cuts.
The only option I can see beyond just going along with Hunt's changes or borrowing more (something equally open to political attack, but probably a decent option if interest rates fall) is to promise a fairly major reshuffle of the tax burden so that the majority of voters pay the same or less than now, and a smaller number pay much more. But you don't achieve that just by adding VAT to school fees or tweaking windfall taxes.
There are a few taxes that don't directly hit voters' take home pay, that might be up for grabs if Labour decide not to reverse the NI cuts:
- Employer's NI. Yes it's a "tax on jobs" but joblessness is not a major problem at the moment, and our all-inclusive wage levels are well below our OECD peers - Corporation tax. Already gone up so the headline rate is hard to shift, but broadening of the base yet again might be a sneaky - but long term counterproductive - option - VAT. Yes people pay it but it's less visible than income tax. Could go up to 25%, or 23% as it is in Ireland - CGT. Just hits the very richest. PE industry and others would scream but most voters wouldn't notice - Additional rate on very high earners.
Reeves' speech today will be fascinating.
Remember, Keir Starmer is a coward, and is scared to upset the media.
Re London’s nightlife. Covid definitely had a massive effect. As did Brexit to a much lesser extent
But london has also gone from a Muslim population of ~300,000 to ~1,400,000 in 20 years. Muslims don’t drink or go to clubs. Or if they go to clubs they don’t drink. So nightlife dies
You can see this is in the widespread closure of pubs in tower hamlets etc
Many may welcome this change. Especially old nimbys who hate noise. Good for them and god speed - but I don’t. If I want a quiet sober Muslim city I’ll go to Fez. London is meant to be a buzzing world city or it is nothing
Its yet another tragic consequence of an insanely cavalier immigration policy; imagining that importing ten million people with a very different culture will have no effect
Once more the Nomadic Yet Rooted Patriot considers a topic and with considerable skill and imagination discerns the 'Muslim-skeptic' angle.
One of the multitude of reasons that I think that May is a non starter for an election is that the economy seems to be recovering rather well from its technical recession last year (which I expect to be revised away long after this government is burnt toast). Services continued to grow strongly in February with new orders particularly strong. A few months of that will paint a much better picture than the government could demonstrate right now. Technical recession or not, growth last year was truly abysmal.
Why would the Tories want to give Labour a flying start? Why would they want to deny themselves a sliver of good news along with all the crud they have delivered?
But is it just a "technical recovery?"
My company thinks the economic situation is overblown and we will return to 1.8-1.9% GDP growth next year, and over 2% in London and the SE.
This isn't enough but it's much better than what we've had recently.
It feels that way. Activity is cautiously on the up across most of the economy.
People anticipating a Labour government and the return to economic competence ;-)
Yes, I'm looking forward to the abolition of boom and bust, again.
Be fair, Gordon Brown did abolish the boom part.
Gordon abolished TORY boom and bust. He was quite clear about that.
If you want to abolish boom and bust generally you have to first abolish capitalism. It's one of its USPs.
Amazing how people ever believed that nonsense. But they did.
The trouble was HE did. And TBF it was the prevailing wisdom at the time. The Financial Sector could self-regulate, Banks know how to manage Risk, Governments could act to smooth the cyclical peaks and troughs.
Alan Greenspan was the single biggest individual to blame.
The European Union has threatened to cut off weapons to the UK and keep arms within the bloc - in new plans announced to prepare for a potential conflict with Russia. ... The plans would also see EU countries forced to limit the amount of weapons they could buy from UK-based firms, including BAE systems, if they wanted to receive extra funds from the bloc's budget allocation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13161869/EU-cut-Britain-weapon-supply-war-Putin-russia-ukraine.html
That's two Brexit benefits in one!
Then we form a new defence pact with Canada, Turkey and Norway and Iceland and maybe even the US too. All in NATO like us but not the EU
Interestingly, I'm on a train (that's not the interesting bit, Sunil).
We are 35 mins into a 70mins journey. The train is full. And the 40-ish woman across from me (on the train with her husband/partner/boyfriend/whatever) has just put one of those basic, NHS handout-type covid masks on.
Bloody traitor!
I hope you still have your services issue sidearm to hand to show her the error of her ways.
Comments
The EU not unreasonably wants to foster domestic defence manufacturing (in the same way the US, and indeed we do).
Whether the proposal is entirely practical is doubtful, but the motivation is fairly sensible.
Live up to that, Paris!
That was exceptional. I also have had a jury that found charges of not proven(same as not guilty) despite overwhelming evidence. I was struggling to hide my disgust and I noted 2 female jurors were in tears.
No system is perfect. I don’t have any special insight and am not entirely objective but I would say that I can understand a jury decision about 95% of the time, even if I don’t agree with it. I haven’t seen the jury program yet.
Recorded crime data by Community Safety Partnership area
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/datasets/recordedcrimedatabycommunitysafetypartnershiparea
Those odds are absurd.
So Eden, which is mostly sheep, fells, moorland, farms, towns with populations of about 2,000 (Brough, Kirkby Stephen), tiny villages etc is now in with Barrow, which makes nuclear submarines and where you can buy a house of sorts for £50K.
Fiscal drag: The same person whose pay has gone up 15% over two or three years to keep up with inflation will be paying IT and NI on an extra 4.5K. This is roughly an extra £1250.
If they have a student loan it is worse.
YMMV.
Falls far short of any kind of, indeed makes no claims whatsoever to be a study but shows an everyman's experience of it. And is bloody funny.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt22074164/
'Michelle Donelan, the science minister, has apologised and paid damages after accusing two academics of “sharing extremist views” and one of them of supporting Hamas. [...] Donelan’s department said that it had paid the damages and legal costs when asked who had done so, adding: “This was subject to all the usual cross-government processes and aims to reduce the overall costs to the taxpayer that could result from protracted legal action.”'
Ms Donelan is lucky this news is coming out on Budget Day.
1) Innocent. But no jury has, or can find anyone "innocent".
2) Not guilty. A reasonable doubt exists over guilt.
3) Not proven. We really think you did it, but the evidence just isn't quite there...
Top of the list appears to be Birmingham - coincidentally, given it was sponsored by a West Midlands garage door company. Hardly, 'up north'.
We are 35 mins into a 70mins journey. The train is full. And the 40-ish woman across from me (on the train with her husband/partner/boyfriend/whatever) has just put one of those basic, NHS handout-type covid masks on.
A defence lawyer is giving a speech to the Jury. The evidence is fairly overwhelming but the prosecution don't have a body.
In his speech he tells the jury that the murdered man was going to walk through that door in 2 minutes. The Jury all watch the door. He doesn't, but the fact that they looked, he said, was evidence of a reasonable doubt about whether the man had been murdered.
The Jury convicted and he got to speak to the Jury afterwards. What happened to reasonable doubt, he asked, you all looked at the door.
And one of the Jurors said, "yes, we all did. But your client didn't."
And critics here should note that British firms are not barred from buying and selling, merely that the EU will put its thumb on the scale. America does the same but that has not stopped the US Navy buying Italian frigates while it concentrates on high tech ships.
Secondary factors - social media, fitness, less consumption of alcohol
Irrelevant factors - Sadiq Khan and his Nightlife Tzar.
Build more homes!
NEW: Hunt would not be the first chancellor to try to sabotage his successor, but it's existential this time.
"Absolutely emptying the cupboard is going to be the only way they think they can shock the political system and discomfort the Labour Party"
As @BenZaranko says the picture is “exacerbated by the government announcing things that will cost money, but not having them be implemented until after the election,”
This includes a cap on social care costs and increased defense spending
But some MPs sense a risk the Conservatives find themselves at odds with voters’ priorities heading into the election and vulnerable to accusations of Austerity 2.0
One red wall MP warns ministers will be "out of step with people in areas like mine"
If the criminal leaves no DNA at the scene, how can it prove he didn't do it?
And Michelle Donelan has no obvious qualifications to be Science Minister anyway.
For 14 years, the Tories have failed our economy and left working people worse off.
Taxes rising, prices going up, and now Britain hit by recession.
It’s time for change.
Only Labour has a plan to deliver it - with more jobs, more investment, and more money in your pocket.
Inter alia 55 Tufton St seems to me to be a suppurating sore on the body politic.
https://x.com/poppyeh/status/1765127425544122878?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
We don't want Rishi to steal it...
And what's the point of more jobs when we already have full employment.
(In olden days I'd have just pressed 'Like' and saved the pixels.)
Her qualification to be Science Minister is that she is a proper generalist manager, who won't "get bogged down in all the technical detail".
Because that is a well known, disastrous, problem in British management - too much knowledge of the subject.
Nice thought actually. I will reconsider.
Hunt will be putting more money into people's pockets from April, while planning fictional and undeliverable cuts to public services in 2025. A logical response would be that the country can't afford these tax cuts now given the state of the finances, but any party proposing to reverse them is telling voters it will take money away from them if they vote for it. People will enter the polling station with a clear financial incentive to vote Tory in that situation. That's always the thing with tax cuts.
The only option I can see beyond just going along with Hunt's changes or borrowing more (something equally open to political attack, but probably a decent option if interest rates fall) is to promise a fairly major reshuffle of the tax burden so that the majority of voters pay the same or less than now, and a smaller number pay much more. But you don't achieve that just by adding VAT to school fees or tweaking windfall taxes.
There are a few taxes that don't directly hit voters' take home pay, that might be up for grabs if Labour decide not to reverse the NI cuts:
- Employer's NI. Yes it's a "tax on jobs" but joblessness is not a major problem at the moment, and our all-inclusive wage levels are well below our OECD peers
- Corporation tax. Already gone up so the headline rate is hard to shift, but broadening of the base yet again might be a sneaky - but long term counterproductive - option
- VAT. Yes people pay it but it's less visible than income tax. Could go up to 25%, or 23% as it is in Ireland
- CGT. Just hits the very richest. PE industry and others would scream but most voters wouldn't notice
- Additional rate on very high earners.
Reeves' speech today will be fascinating.
But seriously, it's fine. "Evolve or die" applies as much to internet forums as anything else.
Over half of Koreans say first lady controversy will impact voting decision
https://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/nation/2024/03/356_370142.html
..
Lee Hyo-jin
Print Preview
Font Size Up
Font Size Down
facebooktwitterkakaolinkwhatsappredditmailtolink
Voters will also take corruption allegations involving DPK head into account at polls
By Lee Hyo-jin
Controversies surrounding President Yoon Suk Yeol's wife Kim Keon Hee followed him during his presidential election campaign in 2022. Two years later, the prevailing negative sentiment around the first lady is still casting a shadow over the ruling People Power Party (PPP) in the April 10 parliamentary elections, a poll showed, Wednesday.
Over half, or 57 percent of eligible voters, said that the first lady issue will influence their decision on whom to vote for in the upcoming general elections, according to a public opinion poll conducted by Hankook Research at the request of The Korea Times. Another 39 percent said the issue will not affect their decision.
One key aspect contributing to the negative sentiment about Kim is her alleged involvement in manipulating the stock prices of Deutsch Motors, a BMW dealer in Korea, between 2009 and 2012. In addition, recent revelations that she allegedly received a Dior handbag worth 3 million won ($2,240) from a Korean American pastor in 2022 have added fuel to the public's skepticism.
In the poll, 63 percent of the respondents expressed discontent about the National Assembly's recent rejection of two special investigation bills, one of which called for a special counsel to look into the allegations against the first lady with regard to the aforementioned stock manipulation.
The main opposition Democratic Party of Korea's (DPK) attempt to pass the special bills at a plenary session on Feb. 29 was derailed amid fierce opposition from PPP lawmakers. The bill had been sent back to the Assembly for a re-vote following a presidential veto in January.
The DPK said, Tuesday, that it will reintroduce the special probe bill targeting the first lady, this time including the Dior handbag allegations and other allegations including that she was accompanied by a personal companion on a presidential state visit to Spain...
The opposition leader is also dogged by similar allegations (though not involving a handbag).
If you want to abolish boom and bust generally you have to first abolish capitalism. It's one of its USPs.
Mr. kinabalu, saying Brown abolished 'TORY' boom and bust is akin to Stalin saying he abolished Teutonic genocide.
"Leave it, Selebian, it's not worth it. You agree."
For example a higher rate on cars costing over (plucked from air) £100,000. Nobody can argue it’s a necessity and if you can afford a car that value then the extra high VAT shouldn’t be a problem and if it’s a problem then you probably shouldn’t be buying a £100,000 car in the first place. Same could apply to jewellery/ watches, £100k handbags.
There is aspirational, wanting a nice handbag collection, and there is super wealthy and I don’t think higher lux VaT is going to be considered “anti-aspirational.
In fact its probably easier as there is more central control with fewer independent decision makers providing flexibility.
Former civil service boss Mark Sedwill blames constant rotation of personnel and lack of proper teaching for poorer strategic thinking
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/06/train-government-ministers-properly-and-leave-them-in-post-says-ex-cabinet-secretary
..In 2021, Johnson announced he would “invest in training for civil servants and for ministers, with high standards for online provision as well as the creation of a new physical campus”.
There is currently a “government campus” programme of training for civil servants that has run online and in-person courses for officials since 2020, with a Leadership College for Government.
However, there is not yet a direct replacement for the National School of Government that was closed down under the coalition in 2012 and provided a permanent headquarters for government training...
Former civil service boss Mark Sedwill blames constant rotation of personnel and lack of proper teaching for poorer strategic thinking
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2024/mar/06/train-government-ministers-properly-and-leave-them-in-post-says-ex-cabinet-secretary
The claim
"I actually said, 'No more Tory boom and bust'."
Gordon Brown, the Daily Mail, 11 October 2008
The verdict
Brown has talked specifically about the end of Tory boom and bust, but to suggest, as he did in the Mail interview, that it was always the mantra seems faintly ludicrous to anyone with an internet connection and the inclination to trawl through his public statements and speeches.
It's arguable how much this matters on a grander economic scale: would a "Labour" boom and bust really be any better than a "Tory" boom and bust?
Brown has criticised what he sees as the components of Tory boom and bust, or more specifically bust - the high interest rates, the three million unemployed. As Labour never tires of telling us, things aren't as bad now as they were then. Or at least, they aren't yet.
But Brown's claim to the Mail just doesn't stand up. There have just been too many memorable references to the end of boom and bust - without any mention of Tory.
https://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/domestic_politics/factcheck+no+more+boom+and+bust/2564157.html
I hope someone on PB can enlighten me!!
NEW THREAD
https://twitter.com/BruceReuters/status/1765142871777186111
Remarkable - HM Treasury's official budget trail stuffed with political content from Hunt's speech.
Haven't seen that before in previous Budget/Autumn Statement trails.
The expanded version is also a much less effective soundbite.
I know those infernal Tax Credits weren't everybody's cup of tea but still.
But london has also gone from a Muslim population of ~300,000 to ~1,400,000 in 20 years. Muslims don’t drink or go to clubs. Or if they go to clubs they don’t drink. So nightlife dies
You can see this is in the widespread closure of pubs in tower hamlets etc
Many may welcome this change. Especially old nimbys who hate noise. Good for them and god speed - but I don’t. If I want a quiet sober Muslim city I’ll go to Fez. London is meant to be a buzzing world city or it is nothing
Its yet another tragic consequence of an insanely cavalier immigration policy; imagining that importing ten million people with a very different culture will have no effect
"I can unleash my army of drones, robots, and cyborgs to hunt you down and capture you."
https://futurism.com/microsoft-copilot-alter-egos
Alan Greenspan was the single biggest individual to blame.
I hope you still have your services issue sidearm to hand to show her the error of her ways.