Germany is more exposed to energy price shocks from Russia than we are. Not everything is Brexit. At the same time, you can't point to other countries having different issues to us and say that it disproves Brexit is a problem for us.
Why not ? You point at just about anything and cry Brexit. It's a two way street. We could of course take a balanced approach but that wouldnt be PB would it ?
In fairness Brexit has been an obsession or source of causation in some posters minds that bears a remarkable similarity to the position that the EU held before Brexit in the minds of many Brexiteers. At that time the EU was irrationally blamed for most of our self inflicted problems and used as both a punchbag and excuse for every failure. There is some moral equivalence in those so obsessed with Brexit now doing the same.
Doesn't mean that both are not wrong and irrational, of course. In an ideal world we would start to accept the consequences of our own decisions in a mature way. But we are so far from that that it seems naïve even to dream about it.
That argument has some sense, but it would be more completely convincing if Brexit had been promptly and efficiently implemented. A lot of people in business are finding real problems, and more will.
They polled advertisers and associated trades before the referendum and the figures were 93% Remain. At the time the UK was second in the world behind the US and in terms of creativity arguably top.
Whether it helped eylets factories in Hartlepool I have no idea but I'm absolutely certain it has screwed up many more people and industries than it has benefitted.
Yes but advertisers are a bunch of lying bastatrds. It's their job. If the advertisers are for it, we should all be against it.
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
Indeed, it's all those unsold German vehicles and consumer electronics rusting portside in Calais awaiting the correct paperwork.
sounds good to me, we may get some relief on the balance of payments.
Balance of payments is a function of domestic demand: unless you increase UK household savings rates, all you will do is change where you suck imports un from.
If imports rise in price then domestic production becomes more profitable.
That the theory, certainly.
However, very few products are made entirely with components from one country. And if you're manufacturing, you will almost certainly need capital equipment (machines that make things), and that almost certainly means importing them. And at the very least, you will be paying the world (US dollar) prices for electricity and energy.
It is worth noting that Switzerland - whose currency has been dramatically stronger than the Pound over the last thirty years - has grow its exports more than 4-times relative to the UK in that period. Four times. With a massively stronger currency.
The UK's trade deficit is near enough equal to its tourism deficit.
Stick a 100% tax on foreign holidays for 'environmental reasons' and you'd get demand shifted to labour intensive domestic production.
Might be a vote winner in clapped out coastal communities as well. But not anywhere else.
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
Indeed, it's all those unsold German vehicles and consumer electronics rusting portside in Calais awaiting the correct paperwork.
sounds good to me, we may get some relief on the balance of payments.
Balance of payments is a function of domestic demand: unless you increase UK household savings rates, all you will do is change where you suck imports un from.
Some PBers are obsessed with household savings rates, and they are the ones who have been brainwashed by your video on the subject. Have you considered a career in politics. What we need is more domestic capacity (and less foreign tourism; sorry, Leon).
Germany is more exposed to energy price shocks from Russia than we are. Not everything is Brexit. At the same time, you can't point to other countries having different issues to us and say that it disproves Brexit is a problem for us.
I was being sarcastic.
In the scale of things Brexit has been, even in this country, a triviality compared to covid and energy prices.
It's not if you have say French suppliers and German customers.
Dont use French suppliers in the first place, they're a nightmare.
You might have let the government know before they booked Sizewell and Hinckley.
It was total madness. But anything involving Osborne just goes bad.
I shall now watch as we fk up get RR mini nuke stations going. Something where we have a lead and could create genuine green jobs, but well hand it over to the civil servants and the protestors.
I think Susan Hall will lose but might do a little better than her odds suggest. Am not a London-dweller these days, but ULEZ (which was a Conservative policy?) does seem to still motivate a great deal of anti-Khan feeling in the blue ‘burbs.
It’s not a dynamic or appealing contest though. Hopefully both parties are giving proper thought to their next candidate.
To be anti-ULEZ now it’s been implemented, you have to:
- Not believe the stats on the impact on air quality, or not care - Drive, and enjoy cars and driving - Not enjoy cars and driving enough to have a petrol car less than 20 years old or a diesel less than 8 years old - if you were affected, still not changed car since ULEZ extension came in
That’s a pretty small voter demographic
One of the fears of the ULEZ was that the criteria would be tightened over time. So people with a compliant car now might worry that it could suddenly be non-compliant tomorrow.
well isnt that inevitable ? Once a threshold has been crossed the costs only go one way.
Yes. I was trying to be gentle about the point.
The end state for the ULEZ would be zero tailpipe emissions vehicles only.
I think Euro 6 as 'acceptable' for anti-pollution schemes is safe for an extended period of time. I bought my Euro 6 car with back in 2018 with such schemes in mind, with the intention of keeping it until electric cars become practical for my need. That could be 2030+.
The Euro 7 standard is not coming in even on new vehicles for several years.
The big cause on the pareto chart for pollution will be the remaining minority of pre-2016 vehicles, and blanket exemptions such as taxis which are allowed to continue to pollute. Plus the current level for petrol vehicles is several jumps away - is it currently Euro 4 ie 2006 registration.
That and targeting the need for a shift away from space inefficient forms of private transport to alternatives more suitable for cities.
London is continuing to invest, and imo will be OK, and Susan Hall will be marooned back in the 1980s somewhere.
IIRC the majority of pollution - especially particulates - comes from a minority of vehicles.
We should move to a more balanced scheme which encourages small vehicles. Too much of the taxation and "road calming" systems encourage large electric SUVs at the moment - very little taxation and they laugh at road humps.
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
It can be done. Noone swam to south cuba in the 2000s.
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
IIRC they are going to use a chartered jet.
If they can find a company willing to charter one to them.
Notably Taiwan is now the sixth most positively viewed county on those polled. And the "US itself" is now fourth on the list of United States’ greatest enemies...
11% of Independents vote for the 'US itself'.
I'll guess that they're political moderates disgusted with the politicians in WDC.
3% of Dems regard Israel as the USA's greatest enemy and another 3% view Ukraine - illustrating the unpleasant extremes some 'progressives' wallow in.
Overall Ukraine having a net of +30 and Russia of -78 is a good sign.
Not totally unrelated. Brexit undoubtedly encouraged Putin that the West was weak and he should try his hand in Ukraine.
Desperate.
Perhaps the utter weakness shown by the West to all the other Russian aggressions had more to do with it.
Or that Germany had Putin's fan girl GDR Merkel hooking the German economy on Russian energy and Russian money for 16 years.
Or that sleepy Joe had presided over humiliation in Afghanistan.
Or that the Western world had been making defence cuts for three decades irrespective of the world situation.
Brexit is at least as convincing a contributor as any of those.
Weak whataboutery on your part: You mention German living standards falling and sarcastically suggest it's due to Brexit; I point out that there is a link; you raise several other things that may or may not have contributed. So what? Brexit was definitely a factor in encouraging Putin, and Putin invading Ukraine is definitely a major cause of German economic woes.
So you think the West's weakness to all the other Russian aggression may not have contributed.
Or that how Germany had become hooked on Russian energy may not have contributed even though Germany was doing everything it could to hinder arms deliveries to Ukraine:
Or that Sleepy Joe's humiliation in Kabul may not have contributed.
Or that three decades of Western defence cuts may not have been contributed.
But that Brexit was 'definitely a factor' ???
Brexit really isn't the be-all-and-end-all obsessionals on either side think it is.
It neither caused the invasion of Ukraine nor allowed Boris to play 'Winston in Kyiv'.
tfb I don't think anyone in Germany has mentioned 'Brexit' as a factor in anything for a long time.
Brexit was a big foreign news story some years ago, a bit like Zika virus. If you mention it to people they say 'oh yes that was a big problem in Brazil (Britain) a few years ago, have they dealt with it now, or is it still causing problems?'
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
Off topic. Had a dream last night that Trump won a landslide that included California.
Even in the unlikely event Trump won and with a landslide it still probably wouldn't include California. Even New York state is more likely to vote for Trump than California
Anecdata that might be of some small comfort to Number 10: I've not picked up any hostility to Rishi personally or even as Prime Minister.
Well I certainly have, and not just from my tory-voting blue wall friend either.
Lots of people I know think he’s godawful and useless. My LibDem leaning, but sometime tory voting, brother can’t stand Sunak especially his parroting nonsense and bizarre fixation with sending people off to Rwanda. He think Sunak’s gone potty.
The polls back me up on this. Sunak is immensely unpopular.
Thinking the Prime Minister is useless does not necessarily mean people are hostile to him; they might be indifferent. If you are right then replacing the leader will improve the party's prospects. If I'm right, it will be futile.
Replacing the leader will be futile. The problem is the Conservative *brand*, not *just* Sunak. A good leader, given time, could fix the brand (*). But Sunak is not a good leader; the party is not in the mood to be led, and there is no time.
(*) As Hague and IDS did not, but Howard and Cameron did.
This is exactly it. Nobody know what they stand for or what you could get if voting for them. It spans big state one nation blairism, blood and soil ethnonationalism, or radical libertarianism. It is freaking bonkers the range of possible outcomes you could get. And, of course, because they contain such radical ideological divergence, their majority is utterly useless.... they cannot enact anything. I am astounded that 1/5 of the population is willing to vote for this dumpster fire. Surely it can only be due to unthinking habitation over many decades that keeps even these voters locked in 🤷
On the other hand, we have little idea what Starmer will do with his stonking majority. There seem to be lots of "don't frighten the horses!" small change rhetoric, but there's a good chance Starmer will be much braver than Blair was when faced with a large majority.
What is 'Starmerism'?
Didn't you read the leading telegraph article today. Reeves is giving the Maise Lecture today.
No, I didn't. It's paywalled, so I could only read the first couple of lines.
But there's one thing I'd say: if she's really aiming for a decade of renewal, then it's a positive thing, as few politicians ever look beyond the next electoral cycle. Although I'd prefer two decades.
You believe it’s more than a nice phrase?
If Labour get the stonking majority I think they'll get, then they'll have enough room for brave, long-term thinking and planning.
Things Blair lacked.
Having the room is not the same as taking advantage of it
No but it’s pretty desperate stuff on here from the remaining right wingers that they think Labour will fail.
It may take a long time to fix things, and I’m not now sure Labour will get this country back on track, but compared to the horror show of the last 5 years it may seem like sunlit uplands once more.
The tories could be out of power for a very, very, long time.
Tories will still be in power after GE2024
Most likely SirKidStarver and Auterity Reeves Tories in power.
I don't think it is useful calling SKS's Labour Tories - they may be as economically right wing as Cameronite and Osbournite Tories were, but there are some (troubling) key differences.
SKS is a petty authoritarian in ways that some Tories, most notably Cameron, just aren't. I am still of the belief that if he wins a large enough majority he will just remove the whip from anyone on the left of the party at the first opportunity, as he has done as LOTO.
He will likely keep and expand the anti protest laws the current crop of Tories have brought in, and will likely do Blairist "nanny state" sort of regulations that are atypical for the Tory party. I also think that SKS's Labour will be much more technocratic than Tories tend to be - especially with their words of warmth towards AI being involved in NHS triaging and the like. The same Blairite mentality that proliferated CCTV cameras in the UK will similarly inform SKS's policies for the worse.
Well yes I agree with all of that but I guess I was making the point there is no legislation coming from SKS that is traditionally seen as Labour and loads associated with the blue team
For this week's task you will be running a press office. Nexus, you will be working for Kensington Palace. Supream, you will be working for the Conservative party.
It's a long time since I've watched The Apprentice (it used to be favourite comedy viewing for Mrs Romford and me), but has there ever been an episode where both sides were sent to Cafe Loser?
No, but isn't that a good idea. We have had repeated weeks in this series where the "winning" team did terribly but less terribly than the "losing team".
In the business plan era my assumption is that Seralan eyes up the proposals and makes his firing decisions based on that.
We don’t watch every episode, but we have the last two or three and while neither team did that badly last night, we thought that someone on the winning team deserved to be (holding a ‘wine experience’ without having a clue about wine) the chap who was fired was told by Siralan to ‘keep in touch’. Make that last what you will!
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
Anecdata that might be of some small comfort to Number 10: I've not picked up any hostility to Rishi personally or even as Prime Minister.
Well I certainly have, and not just from my tory-voting blue wall friend either.
Lots of people I know think he’s godawful and useless. My LibDem leaning, but sometime tory voting, brother can’t stand Sunak especially his parroting nonsense and bizarre fixation with sending people off to Rwanda. He think Sunak’s gone potty.
The polls back me up on this. Sunak is immensely unpopular.
Thinking the Prime Minister is useless does not necessarily mean people are hostile to him; they might be indifferent. If you are right then replacing the leader will improve the party's prospects. If I'm right, it will be futile.
Replacing the leader will be futile. The problem is the Conservative *brand*, not *just* Sunak. A good leader, given time, could fix the brand (*). But Sunak is not a good leader; the party is not in the mood to be led, and there is no time.
(*) As Hague and IDS did not, but Howard and Cameron did.
Yes. Another aspect of change, not well understood by movers and shakers, is that once an institution has established a pattern of behaviour characterised by both constant changes and incompetence, then the next quick change is seen as a further destructive act, proving how useless you still are, as you have been in the past.
Starmer's single best piece of good fortune is the passing of a long time since Labour had a chance to run the country. Iraq, Afghanistan and bank collapse are a long time ago.
Somebody has checked the details of the bombing runs in the recent "Masters Of The Air" series. The level of sheer nerdery in the check[1] inspires awe and admiration, whilst backing away nervously. Enjoy
[1] For example he counted the number of bombs each aircraft dropped and the drop interval, compared it to the real thing and noted the difference in bomb damage implied by them.
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
Anecdata that might be of some small comfort to Number 10: I've not picked up any hostility to Rishi personally or even as Prime Minister.
Well I certainly have, and not just from my tory-voting blue wall friend either.
Lots of people I know think he’s godawful and useless. My LibDem leaning, but sometime tory voting, brother can’t stand Sunak especially his parroting nonsense and bizarre fixation with sending people off to Rwanda. He think Sunak’s gone potty.
The polls back me up on this. Sunak is immensely unpopular.
Thinking the Prime Minister is useless does not necessarily mean people are hostile to him; they might be indifferent. If you are right then replacing the leader will improve the party's prospects. If I'm right, it will be futile.
Replacing the leader will be futile. The problem is the Conservative *brand*, not *just* Sunak. A good leader, given time, could fix the brand (*). But Sunak is not a good leader; the party is not in the mood to be led, and there is no time.
(*) As Hague and IDS did not, but Howard and Cameron did.
This is exactly it. Nobody know what they stand for or what you could get if voting for them. It spans big state one nation blairism, blood and soil ethnonationalism, or radical libertarianism. It is freaking bonkers the range of possible outcomes you could get. And, of course, because they contain such radical ideological divergence, their majority is utterly useless.... they cannot enact anything. I am astounded that 1/5 of the population is willing to vote for this dumpster fire. Surely it can only be due to unthinking habitation over many decades that keeps even these voters locked in 🤷
On the other hand, we have little idea what Starmer will do with his stonking majority. There seem to be lots of "don't frighten the horses!" small change rhetoric, but there's a good chance Starmer will be much braver than Blair was when faced with a large majority.
What is 'Starmerism'?
Didn't you read the leading telegraph article today. Reeves is giving the Maise Lecture today.
No, I didn't. It's paywalled, so I could only read the first couple of lines.
But there's one thing I'd say: if she's really aiming for a decade of renewal, then it's a positive thing, as few politicians ever look beyond the next electoral cycle. Although I'd prefer two decades.
You believe it’s more than a nice phrase?
If Labour get the stonking majority I think they'll get, then they'll have enough room for brave, long-term thinking and planning.
Things Blair lacked.
Having the room is not the same as taking advantage of it
No but it’s pretty desperate stuff on here from the remaining right wingers that they think Labour will fail.
It may take a long time to fix things, and I’m not now sure Labour will get this country back on track, but compared to the horror show of the last 5 years it may seem like sunlit uplands once more.
The tories could be out of power for a very, very, long time.
Tories will still be in power after GE2024
Most likely SirKidStarver and Auterity Reeves Tories in power.
I don't think it is useful calling SKS's Labour Tories - they may be as economically right wing as Cameronite and Osbournite Tories were, but there are some (troubling) key differences.
SKS is a petty authoritarian in ways that some Tories, most notably Cameron, just aren't. I am still of the belief that if he wins a large enough majority he will just remove the whip from anyone on the left of the party at the first opportunity, as he has done as LOTO.
He will likely keep and expand the anti protest laws the current crop of Tories have brought in, and will likely do Blairist "nanny state" sort of regulations that are atypical for the Tory party. I also think that SKS's Labour will be much more technocratic than Tories tend to be - especially with their words of warmth towards AI being involved in NHS triaging and the like. The same Blairite mentality that proliferated CCTV cameras in the UK will similarly inform SKS's policies for the worse.
Well yes I agree with all of that but I guess I was making the point there is no legislation coming from SKS that is traditionally seen as Labour and loads associated with the blue team
"no legislation coming from SKS that is traditionally seen as Labour and loads associated with the blue team" ????
I thought that the "Starmer is actually running the country" thing was a bizarro righty thing.
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Indeed, it's all those unsold German vehicles and consumer electronics rusting portside in Calais awaiting the correct paperwork.
sounds good to me, we may get some relief on the balance of payments.
Balance of payments is a function of domestic demand: unless you increase UK household savings rates, all you will do is change where you suck imports un from.
If imports rise in price then domestic production becomes more profitable.
That the theory, certainly.
However, very few products are made entirely with components from one country. And if you're manufacturing, you will almost certainly need capital equipment (machines that make things), and that almost certainly means importing them. And at the very least, you will be paying the world (US dollar) prices for electricity and energy.
It is worth noting that Switzerland - whose currency has been dramatically stronger than the Pound over the last thirty years - has grow its exports more than 4-times relative to the UK in that period. Four times. With a massively stronger currency.
The UK's trade deficit is near enough equal to its tourism deficit.
Stick a 100% tax on foreign holidays for 'environmental reasons' and you'd get demand shifted to labour intensive domestic production.
Might be a vote winner in clapped out coastal communities as well. But not anywhere else.
if Labour wanted to lose the next election a massive, 100%, tax on flying overseas (or anywhere) would be just the way to do it. The millions of 20-45 environmentally conscious progressive voters they need as their core entirely exempt cheap and frequent flying from all their eco calculations, while at the same time investigating the sustainability of their jampot covers.
With Sunak's unerring political antennae, I assume he will be telling them what a good job he thinks they are doing, and thanking them for their support.
Somebody has checked the details of the bombing runs in the recent "Masters Of The Air" series. The level of sheer nerdery in the check[1] inspires awe and admiration, whilst backing away nervously. Enjoy
[1] For example he counted the number of bombs each aircraft dropped and the drop interval, compared it to the real thing and noted the difference in bomb damage implied by them.
Only watched MOTA up to 1944; without watching the Youtube, the main crushing problem for me was that the MOTA B17s are mainly Fs while at that point in the war they would have been Gs with the distinctive chin turret. Very poor show from the makers of MOTA.
@londonpubman asked if there was still time for Rishi to call an election on 2nd May.
Yes there is. Scenario:
Rishi goes to the 1922 committee tomorrow after 2 more days of relentless kite flying ("are you a horse") of potential replacements. 2 more days of political and intellectual giants like Jonathan Gullis mouthing off on the WhatsApp group.
In summary, the meeting is an utter car crash. The divide both between Sunak and his remaining loyalists and the various groups of racists, fruit cakes and loonies who make up Tory backbenchers is catastrophically wide.
Sunak realises that he will be ousted in May, or at least they will come for him. The grand plan - win London, make people understand he's made them better off and that Starmer has no plan, followed by another tax cut bonanza and then a November repeat of 1992 - is done.
And so after a night of wakeful sleep he instructs the palace to set up a meeting with Chaz and off we go.
I don't expect this will happen. But it could. In this febrile atmosphere anything could happen. And the date that parliament has to dissolve itself for a 2nd May election is Tuesday 26th March...
With Sunak's unerring political antennae, I assume he will be telling them what a good job he thinks they are doing, and thanking them for their support.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and predict he tells them he will cut tax if they wait and stick with him until autumn.
Indeed, it's all those unsold German vehicles and consumer electronics rusting portside in Calais awaiting the correct paperwork.
sounds good to me, we may get some relief on the balance of payments.
Balance of payments is a function of domestic demand: unless you increase UK household savings rates, all you will do is change where you suck imports un from.
If imports rise in price then domestic production becomes more profitable.
That the theory, certainly.
However, very few products are made entirely with components from one country. And if you're manufacturing, you will almost certainly need capital equipment (machines that make things), and that almost certainly means importing them. And at the very least, you will be paying the world (US dollar) prices for electricity and energy.
It is worth noting that Switzerland - whose currency has been dramatically stronger than the Pound over the last thirty years - has grow its exports more than 4-times relative to the UK in that period. Four times. With a massively stronger currency.
The UK's trade deficit is near enough equal to its tourism deficit.
Stick a 100% tax on foreign holidays for 'environmental reasons' and you'd get demand shifted to labour intensive domestic production.
Might be a vote winner in clapped out coastal communities as well. But not anywhere else.
if Labour wanted to lose the next election a massive, 100%, tax on flying overseas (or anywhere) would be just the way to do it. The millions of 20-45 environmentally conscious progressive voters they need as their core entirely exempt cheap and frequent flying from all their eco calculations, while at the same time investigating the sustainability of their jampot covers.
Anecdata that might be of some small comfort to Number 10: I've not picked up any hostility to Rishi personally or even as Prime Minister.
Well I certainly have, and not just from my tory-voting blue wall friend either.
Lots of people I know think he’s godawful and useless. My LibDem leaning, but sometime tory voting, brother can’t stand Sunak especially his parroting nonsense and bizarre fixation with sending people off to Rwanda. He think Sunak’s gone potty.
The polls back me up on this. Sunak is immensely unpopular.
Thinking the Prime Minister is useless does not necessarily mean people are hostile to him; they might be indifferent. If you are right then replacing the leader will improve the party's prospects. If I'm right, it will be futile.
Replacing the leader will be futile. The problem is the Conservative *brand*, not *just* Sunak. A good leader, given time, could fix the brand (*). But Sunak is not a good leader; the party is not in the mood to be led, and there is no time.
(*) As Hague and IDS did not, but Howard and Cameron did.
This is exactly it. Nobody know what they stand for or what you could get if voting for them. It spans big state one nation blairism, blood and soil ethnonationalism, or radical libertarianism. It is freaking bonkers the range of possible outcomes you could get. And, of course, because they contain such radical ideological divergence, their majority is utterly useless.... they cannot enact anything. I am astounded that 1/5 of the population is willing to vote for this dumpster fire. Surely it can only be due to unthinking habitation over many decades that keeps even these voters locked in 🤷
On the other hand, we have little idea what Starmer will do with his stonking majority. There seem to be lots of "don't frighten the horses!" small change rhetoric, but there's a good chance Starmer will be much braver than Blair was when faced with a large majority.
What is 'Starmerism'?
Didn't you read the leading telegraph article today. Reeves is giving the Maise Lecture today.
No, I didn't. It's paywalled, so I could only read the first couple of lines.
But there's one thing I'd say: if she's really aiming for a decade of renewal, then it's a positive thing, as few politicians ever look beyond the next electoral cycle. Although I'd prefer two decades.
You believe it’s more than a nice phrase?
If Labour get the stonking majority I think they'll get, then they'll have enough room for brave, long-term thinking and planning.
Things Blair lacked.
Having the room is not the same as taking advantage of it
No but it’s pretty desperate stuff on here from the remaining right wingers that they think Labour will fail.
It may take a long time to fix things, and I’m not now sure Labour will get this country back on track, but compared to the horror show of the last 5 years it may seem like sunlit uplands once more.
The tories could be out of power for a very, very, long time.
Tories will still be in power after GE2024
Most likely SirKidStarver and Auterity Reeves Tories in power.
I don't think it is useful calling SKS's Labour Tories - they may be as economically right wing as Cameronite and Osbournite Tories were, but there are some (troubling) key differences.
SKS is a petty authoritarian in ways that some Tories, most notably Cameron, just aren't. I am still of the belief that if he wins a large enough majority he will just remove the whip from anyone on the left of the party at the first opportunity, as he has done as LOTO.
He will likely keep and expand the anti protest laws the current crop of Tories have brought in, and will likely do Blairist "nanny state" sort of regulations that are atypical for the Tory party. I also think that SKS's Labour will be much more technocratic than Tories tend to be - especially with their words of warmth towards AI being involved in NHS triaging and the like. The same Blairite mentality that proliferated CCTV cameras in the UK will similarly inform SKS's policies for the worse.
Well yes I agree with all of that but I guess I was making the point there is no legislation coming from SKS that is traditionally seen as Labour and loads associated with the blue team
Four reasons for this. There is no money. He has an election to win from the centre, needing about 2 million Tory voters to help. The Overton window is vanishingly tiny. We already live in a social democrat country, currently with right wing window dressing combined with incompetence, so he doesn't need to do more than tinker as long as he can run systems well.
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
And no in-flight catering, I bet. Talk about no-frills.
Somebody has checked the details of the bombing runs in the recent "Masters Of The Air" series. The level of sheer nerdery in the check[1] inspires awe and admiration, whilst backing away nervously. Enjoy
[1] For example he counted the number of bombs each aircraft dropped and the drop interval, compared it to the real thing and noted the difference in bomb damage implied by them.
Only watched MOTA up to 1944; without watching the Youtube, the main crushing problem for me was that the MOTA B17s are mainly Fs while at that point in the war they would have been Gs with the distinctive chin turret. Very poor show from the makers of MOTA.
Haven't watched it - gave up after the first episode. Did they leave out the YB-40 experiments that led to the chin turret (in the last few Fs) and the revised layout of the Gs?
At the end of the day yet another leadership change will not make the slightest difference to Tory poll ratings. Cutting tax, growing wages and the economy, getting interest rates stable and controlling immigration will
I don't see what difference cutting taxes does - for average people any cut in national taxes is a pittance and is more than made up by increases in council taxes or the fact government services are terrible. As for wage growth - the government have been actively campaigning against wage growth to prevent an "inflation spiral" despite the fact inflation wasn't caused by wage growth at all, it was caused by a bottle neck in the supply chain. I agree that Tories won't win unless material conditions for more voters change - but changing those material conditions is anathema to Tory beliefs.
I don't think it achieves anything in current circumstances.
But a one-club golfer like the current UK Government / current version of the Conservative Party, only has one golf club - by definition.
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
The Black Swan for the Tories is Nigel Farage. Not tax cuts, not Rwanda, not Starmer who doesn't have a plan or know what a woman is and who defends Terrorists.
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Is that on p.9 of the Green Party manifesto.
Yes, that is the Green proposal for deterring people from flying off on polluting holidays with Ryanair.
Somebody has checked the details of the bombing runs in the recent "Masters Of The Air" series. The level of sheer nerdery in the check[1] inspires awe and admiration, whilst backing away nervously. Enjoy
[1] For example he counted the number of bombs each aircraft dropped and the drop interval, compared it to the real thing and noted the difference in bomb damage implied by them.
Only watched MOTA up to 1944; without watching the Youtube, the main crushing problem for me was that the MOTA B17s are mainly Fs while at that point in the war they would have been Gs with the distinctive chin turret. Very poor show from the makers of MOTA.
Haven't watched it - gave up after the first episode. Did they leave out the YB-40 experiments that led to the chin turret (in the last few Fs) and the revised layout of the Gs?
Dunno but don't think so. Pretty sure they set up their CGIs based on an B17F and continued with that through all episodes. All the live aircraft were Fs in the episodes I've seen.
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Thanks for confirming what I suspected. Should make interesting television. And if Sneaky Rishi decides to do it behind closed doors after dark he'll have to hope the reception committee in Kigali is equally discreet.
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Thanks for confirming what I suspected. Should make interesting television. And if Sneaky Rishi decides to do it behind closed doors after dark he'll have to hope the reception committee in Kigali is equally discreet.
Doubt they'll need to go that far for most - they've been deporting people for years to other destinations, without that.
The Black Swan for the Tories is Nigel Farage. Not tax cuts, not Rwanda, not Starmer who doesn't have a plan or know what a woman is and who defends Terrorists.
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
Of course within 10 years of Canada 1993 the Canadian Tories and their Reform party had merged, so if Reform did overtake the Tories within a decade Farage would have overtaken the Tories under FPTP. Only PR would keep the Tories as an independent party
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
p.s. I’ve also lent her Suzanne Heywood's What Does Jeremy Think? in the hope that her misguided views on David Cameron may be corrected.
What worries me about that book is that particularly under Blair, Heywood seemed dangerously close to creating policy rather than merely implementing it.
It shouldn’t really worry you. Senior civil servants are far brighter, more measured, more educated, on top of their briefs, and level-headed than 99.9% of elected politicians.
The Daily Mail may profess to hate the idea but thank goodness for civil servants.
It only really comes to a head if you have a conviction politician who is both bright and hard-working, like Margaret Thatcher.
While I can understand Suzanne Heywood's desire to protect the good name of her late husband, Jeremy Heywood would have had some serious questions to answer over his conduct in the Greensill affair had he lived. So I would be a tad sceptical about what she says about that whole imbroglio.
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
The Black Swan for the Tories is Nigel Farage. Not tax cuts, not Rwanda, not Starmer who doesn't have a plan or know what a woman is and who defends Terrorists.
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
The 1979 comparison is interesting more for what will happen next rather than the result of the vote. It is assumed by many, including on this board, that Starmer will crash and burn and the natural Conservative order will swiftly be resumed. I am not convinced. Starmer will likely have the opportunity to be transformative like Thatcher was. Will he take take the opportunity? I suspect he will try. The warning for him though is that Thatcher wasn't at all popular and was only rescued by random Argentinian generals invading an island full of sheep.
Another beautiful Spring morning here in the Queen of Welsh holiday resorts as I continue my progress since my pacemaker 6 weeks ago today by striming and cutting part of our front lawn
The birds are busy in our shrubs holding their daily discussions over nesting materials, the gulls look to last years nest on a nearby neighbour's roof, the pigeons are cooing and let's us never forget life is precious and nature continues despise man's inhumanity to man
And just saw the tiniest of ladybirds - wonderful and the perfect antidote to the toxicity of Trump, Farage and the right
The Black Swan for the Tories is Nigel Farage. Not tax cuts, not Rwanda, not Starmer who doesn't have a plan or know what a woman is and who defends Terrorists.
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
The 1979 comparison is interesting more for what will happen next rather than the result of the vote. It is assumed by many, including on this board, that Starmer will crash and burn and the natural Conservative order will swiftly be resumed. I am not convinced. Starmer will likely have the opportunity to be transformative like Thatcher was. Will he take take the opportunity? I suspect he will try. The warning for him though is that Thatcher wasn't at all popular and was only rescued by random Argentinian generals invading an island full of sheep.
The last isn't true - the polls had turned before the Falklands. The Falklands probably increased the size of the majority at the next election, but it would have been a Conservative victory anyway.
Using a US demographic model the UK would apparently vote Republican apart from London and the big cities (though in reality of course it mostly wouldn't)
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Thanks for confirming what I suspected. Should make interesting television. And if Sneaky Rishi decides to do it behind closed doors after dark he'll have to hope the reception committee in Kigali is equally discreet.
The flights are going to take off from Boscombe at Zero Dark 30 precisely because it's easier to isolate and conceal.
Using a US demographic model the UK would apparently vote Republican apart from London and the big cities (though in reality of course it mostly wouldn't)
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Thanks for confirming what I suspected. Should make interesting television. And if Sneaky Rishi decides to do it behind closed doors after dark he'll have to hope the reception committee in Kigali is equally discreet.
I have an old shipmate who has signed on as an inflight medic for the Kigali Express. He's been sat on his arse being paid a very handsome retainer for nearly two years. He's almost paid for his second divorce with it.
He has had to a couple of practice runs to remote European airports without any detainees onboard but other than that. it's (our) money for nothing.
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Another beautiful Spring morning here in the Queen of Welsh holiday resorts as I continue my progress since my pacemaker 6 weeks ago today by striming and cutting part of our front lawn
The birds are busy in our shrubs holding their daily discussions over nesting materials, the gulls look to last years nest on a nearby neighbour's roof, the pigeons are cooing and let's us never forget life is precious and nature continues despise man's inhumanity to man
And just saw the tiniest of ladybirds - wonderful and the perfect antidote to the toxicity of Trump, Farage and the right
That sounds a nice way to exercise. And yes, I'll take a ladybird over Donald Trump or Nigel Farage any day of the week.
The Black Swan for the Tories is Nigel Farage. Not tax cuts, not Rwanda, not Starmer who doesn't have a plan or know what a woman is and who defends Terrorists.
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
The 1979 comparison is interesting more for what will happen next rather than the result of the vote. It is assumed by many, including on this board, that Starmer will crash and burn and the natural Conservative order will swiftly be resumed. I am not convinced. Starmer will likely have the opportunity to be transformative like Thatcher was. Will he take take the opportunity? I suspect he will try. The warning for him though is that Thatcher wasn't at all popular and was only rescued by random Argentinian generals invading an island full of sheep.
The last isn't true - the polls had turned before the Falklands. The Falklands probably increased the size of the majority at the next election, but it would have been a Conservative victory anyway.
There are a number of political history myths (or part myths) like this.
- The 1970s were dominated by Labour governments struggling with industrial relations (actually the 70s were shared between both parties facing the same issues) - Blair was wildly popular before the 1997 election - Blair’s popularity suddenly slumped after Iraq - Britain voted in 1979 for a radical sea change in economic policy (that’s what they got, but there were few overt signs) - Kinnock’s Sheffield rally lost him the 1992 election (evidence suggests it was the “tax bombshell”)
The Black Swan for the Tories is Nigel Farage. Not tax cuts, not Rwanda, not Starmer who doesn't have a plan or know what a woman is and who defends Terrorists.
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
The 1979 comparison is interesting more for what will happen next rather than the result of the vote. It is assumed by many, including on this board, that Starmer will crash and burn and the natural Conservative order will swiftly be resumed. I am not convinced. Starmer will likely have the opportunity to be transformative like Thatcher was. Will he take take the opportunity? I suspect he will try. The warning for him though is that Thatcher wasn't at all popular and was only rescued by random Argentinian generals invading an island full of sheep.
The last isn't true - the polls had turned before the Falklands. The Falklands probably increased the size of the majority at the next election, but it would have been a Conservative victory anyway.
I just checked. There wasn't a single Mori poll before the Falklands invasion where the Conservatives were in the lead. It is true however that the massive Labour leads had fallen away by early 1982 due to defections to the SDP. So you could say Thatcher and Foot were equally unpopular.
Another beautiful Spring morning here in the Queen of Welsh holiday resorts as I continue my progress since my pacemaker 6 weeks ago today by striming and cutting part of our front lawn
The birds are busy in our shrubs holding their daily discussions over nesting materials, the gulls look to last years nest on a nearby neighbour's roof, the pigeons are cooing and let's us never forget life is precious and nature continues despise man's inhumanity to man
And just saw the tiniest of ladybirds - wonderful and the perfect antidote to the toxicity of Trump, Farage and the right
That sounds a nice way to exercise. And yes, I'll take a ladybird over Donald Trump or Nigel Farage any day of the week.
Our garden is our own gym and though through my recent health issues we do have a gardener on standby, gentle exercise, without overdoing it which I can't anyway, is the order of the day and why we welcome spring so we can enjoy being a wee bit more active
Assuming the flights do start taking off, within a year or so we should anticipate some interesting Panorama documentaries and newspaper long reads.
Journalists will undoubtedly decide to follow a selection of asylum seekers on the journey and as they settle into their new lives. I would expect a mixture of: people making a fist of it in Rwanda and settling in; people sitting around idly with no prospect of work and becoming a burden for the Rwandan state; large numbers waiting a few weeks then setting out on the long journey back to Europe.
That last option seems pretty likely for most. What would I do if I’d tried to get to Britain then been sent to an unfamiliar new country? I’d immediately start on my second attempt. Would I stop short of Britain this time? Good question, I think that would depend heavily on whether I have relatives and friends to join there, and if I speak other languages.
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
The Black Swan for the Tories is Nigel Farage. Not tax cuts, not Rwanda, not Starmer who doesn't have a plan or know what a woman is and who defends Terrorists.
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
The 1979 comparison is interesting more for what will happen next rather than the result of the vote. It is assumed by many, including on this board, that Starmer will crash and burn and the natural Conservative order will swiftly be resumed. I am not convinced. Starmer will likely have the opportunity to be transformative like Thatcher was. Will he take take the opportunity? I suspect he will try. The warning for him though is that Thatcher wasn't at all popular and was only rescued by random Argentinian generals invading an island full of sheep.
Tony Blair's regrets included not "reforming the public services" (which many fear is code for privatisation) on day one. According to Andrew Marr, there is a battle for Starmer's ear (and manifesto) between the traditional right of the Labour Party and the Blairites.
I thought I'd have a play around with chatGPT since @Leon won't stop banging on about it, and he said it had learnt how to draw by itself. So I started with something simple and not especially impressed with the very first prompt I put in.
Hmm, fair enough on ASCII representation though it rather dismisses Leon's claim chatGPT taught itself how to draw, but what an interesting ASCII way of representing 4 blue and 3 green tokens.
The Black Swan for the Tories is Nigel Farage. Not tax cuts, not Rwanda, not Starmer who doesn't have a plan or know what a woman is and who defends Terrorists.
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
The 1979 comparison is interesting more for what will happen next rather than the result of the vote. It is assumed by many, including on this board, that Starmer will crash and burn and the natural Conservative order will swiftly be resumed. I am not convinced. Starmer will likely have the opportunity to be transformative like Thatcher was. Will he take take the opportunity? I suspect he will try. The warning for him though is that Thatcher wasn't at all popular and was only rescued by random Argentinian generals invading an island full of sheep.
Thatcher was rescued by the split in the Labour Party.
But there is a reasonable chance that Starmer will prove to be a transformative PM. I think he would like to be and the country is in such deep doodoo at the moment that even modest progress could seem transformational. He will stop the absurd merry go round of ministers coming and going (average length of service of a minister under the Tories - 8 months!) and the government will come up with a clear programme of policies which it genuinely believes to be in the national interest (which the Tories have not done since about 2013). And it would be reasonable to assume that some of these policies will have a positive impact. If he can combine this with a way of getting the economy growing (big if I know) the stage will be set for him to take more radical steps, which I would expect to include much tougher regulation of privatised utilities, moves to shift taxation away from income and on to wealth, and a much closer relationship with the EU.
The Tories are shot and no one is listening to them. They need something to change the subject that the public might notice. A new leader will turn them into a joke. For Sunak I can only think of only two possibilities that are within his control.
A general election or an offer to revisit of the 2016 EU Referendum
Well no, declare war on France seems a much better option, popular, adventurous and with decent patisseries.
At the moment he seems fixated on Rwanda and small boats so we're on the page. I haven't tried their patisseries but it seems a hell of a journey
You haven't tried Rwandan patisserie? Or you haven't tried French patisserie?
I dreamed about visiting Rwanda last night. Loosely connected with the current news cycle. It all looked very pleasant and suburban - I was remarking at all the nice old 19th century weatherboarded architecture. In fact it was sort of Rwanda and New England, at the same time. I don't recall exactly why I was sent there but it seemed work-related and somehow to do with HS2, which has nothing to do with my actual work.
I had this recurring daydream that if I discovered I had just two days to live I'd spend them in a particular French patisserie
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Thanks for confirming what I suspected. Should make interesting television. And if Sneaky Rishi decides to do it behind closed doors after dark he'll have to hope the reception committee in Kigali is equally discreet.
The flights are going to take off from Boscombe at Zero Dark 30 precisely because it's easier to isolate and conceal.
Surely the first flight will take off from City Airport complete with bunting, balloons, ticker tape and the Dagenham Girl Pipers.
The Black Swan for the Tories is Nigel Farage. Not tax cuts, not Rwanda, not Starmer who doesn't have a plan or know what a woman is and who defends Terrorists.
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
The 1979 comparison is interesting more for what will happen next rather than the result of the vote. It is assumed by many, including on this board, that Starmer will crash and burn and the natural Conservative order will swiftly be resumed. I am not convinced. Starmer will likely have the opportunity to be transformative like Thatcher was. Will he take take the opportunity? I suspect he will try. The warning for him though is that Thatcher wasn't at all popular and was only rescued by random Argentinian generals invading an island full of sheep.
The last isn't true - the polls had turned before the Falklands. The Falklands probably increased the size of the majority at the next election, but it would have been a Conservative victory anyway.
I just checked. There wasn't a single Mori poll before the Falklands invasion where the Conservatives were in the lead. It is true however that the massive Labour leads had fallen away by early 1982 due to defections to the SDP. So you could say Thatcher and Foot were equally unpopular.
The pattern of the 80s was that Thatcher would use her majority to enact policies, and the polls would be looking bad for the government. The policies and the election were timed to create an uptick in the polls for the government.
So we had a series of "government loses by-election - they will lose the next election for sure", followed by "we was robbed again".
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Thanks for confirming what I suspected. Should make interesting television. And if Sneaky Rishi decides to do it behind closed doors after dark he'll have to hope the reception committee in Kigali is equally discreet.
The flights are going to take off from Boscombe at Zero Dark 30 precisely because it's easier to isolate and conceal.
Surely the first flight will take off from City Airport complete with bunting, balloons, ticker tape and the Dagenham Girl Pipers.
Assuming the flights do start taking off, within a year or so we should anticipate some interesting Panorama documentaries and newspaper long reads.
Journalists will undoubtedly decide to follow a selection of asylum seekers on the journey and as they settle into their new lives. I would expect a mixture of: people making a fist of it in Rwanda and settling in; people sitting around idly with no prospect of work and becoming a burden for the Rwandan state; large numbers waiting a few weeks then setting out on the long journey back to Europe.
That last option seems pretty likely for most. What would I do if I’d tried to get to Britain then been sent to an unfamiliar new country? I’d immediately start on my second attempt. Would I stop short of Britain this time? Good question, I think that would depend heavily on whether I have relatives and friends to join there, and if I speak other languages.
"becoming a burden for the Rwandan state"
Good luck with that plan. While they have *some* social protection, IIRC, it is contribution based eligibility.
I think Susan Hall will lose but might do a little better than her odds suggest. Am not a London-dweller these days, but ULEZ (which was a Conservative policy?) does seem to still motivate a great deal of anti-Khan feeling in the blue ‘burbs.
It’s not a dynamic or appealing contest though. Hopefully both parties are giving proper thought to their next candidate.
To be anti-ULEZ now it’s been implemented, you have to:
- Not believe the stats on the impact on air quality, or not care - Drive, and enjoy cars and driving - Not enjoy cars and driving enough to have a petrol car less than 20 years old or a diesel less than 8 years old - if you were affected, still not changed car since ULEZ extension came in
That’s a pretty small voter demographic
One of the fears of the ULEZ was that the criteria would be tightened over time. So people with a compliant car now might worry that it could suddenly be non-compliant tomorrow.
well isnt that inevitable ? Once a threshold has been crossed the costs only go one way.
Yes. I was trying to be gentle about the point.
The end state for the ULEZ would be zero tailpipe emissions vehicles only.
I think Euro 6 as 'acceptable' for anti-pollution schemes is safe for an extended period of time. I bought my Euro 6 car with back in 2018 with such schemes in mind, with the intention of keeping it until electric cars become practical for my need. That could be 2030+.
The Euro 7 standard is not coming in even on new vehicles for several years.
The big cause on the pareto chart for pollution will be the remaining minority of pre-2016 vehicles, and blanket exemptions such as taxis which are allowed to continue to pollute. Plus the current level for petrol vehicles is several jumps away - is it currently Euro 4 ie 2006 registration.
That and targeting the need for a shift away from space inefficient forms of private transport to alternatives more suitable for cities.
London is continuing to invest, and imo will be OK, and Susan Hall will be marooned back in the 1980s somewhere.
IIRC the majority of pollution - especially particulates - comes from a minority of vehicles.
We should move to a more balanced scheme which encourages small vehicles. Too much of the taxation and "road calming" systems encourage large electric SUVs at the moment - very little taxation and they laugh at road humps.
Completely agreed, 100%. We have humps down my road which are a PITA even below let alone at the speed limit for my new, small, hybrid low-polluting vehicle but a large diesel SUV would would take with more ease. They should be completely abolished as a concept.
When it comes to particulates, the pareto principle comes into play. Taxis etc that are driving repeatedly around and around for hours a day emit far more emissions than private vehicles driving down a road twice a day. Yet too many schemes target the latter and not the former.
Exempting taxis etc from standards is utterly insane, they should have the highest standards, not the lowest.
We get this sort of religious shit from tube station operatives quite frequently on their marker pen whiteboards. Usually Christian texts, occasionally something Buddhist, but frankly it’s the same stuff. When they’re not writing live-laugh-love type self help messages
The Black Swan for the Tories is Nigel Farage. Not tax cuts, not Rwanda, not Starmer who doesn't have a plan or know what a woman is and who defends Terrorists.
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
The 1979 comparison is interesting more for what will happen next rather than the result of the vote. It is assumed by many, including on this board, that Starmer will crash and burn and the natural Conservative order will swiftly be resumed. I am not convinced. Starmer will likely have the opportunity to be transformative like Thatcher was. Will he take take the opportunity? I suspect he will try. The warning for him though is that Thatcher wasn't at all popular and was only rescued by random Argentinian generals invading an island full of sheep.
Thatcher was rescued by the split in the Labour Party.
But there is a reasonable chance that Starmer will prove to be a transformative PM. I think he would like to be and the country is in such deep doodoo at the moment that even modest progress could seem transformational. He will stop the absurd merry go round of ministers coming and going (average length of service of a minister under the Tories - 8 months!) and the government will come up with a clear programme of policies which it genuinely believes to be in the national interest (which the Tories have not done since about 2013). And it would be reasonable to assume that some of these policies will have a positive impact. If he can combine this with a way of getting the economy growing (big if I know) the stage will be set for him to take more radical steps, which I would expect to include much tougher regulation of privatised utilities, moves to shift taxation away from income and on to wealth, and a much closer relationship with the EU.
We get this sort of religious shit from tube station operatives quite frequently on their marker pen whiteboards. Usually Christian texts, occasionally something Buddhist, but frankly it’s the same stuff. When they’re not writing live-laugh-love type self help messages
We get this sort of religious shit from tube station operatives quite frequently on their marker pen whiteboards. Usually Christian texts, occasionally something Buddhist, but frankly it’s the same stuff. When they’re not writing live-laugh-love type self help messages
I think Susan Hall will lose but might do a little better than her odds suggest. Am not a London-dweller these days, but ULEZ (which was a Conservative policy?) does seem to still motivate a great deal of anti-Khan feeling in the blue ‘burbs.
It’s not a dynamic or appealing contest though. Hopefully both parties are giving proper thought to their next candidate.
To be anti-ULEZ now it’s been implemented, you have to:
- Not believe the stats on the impact on air quality, or not care - Drive, and enjoy cars and driving - Not enjoy cars and driving enough to have a petrol car less than 20 years old or a diesel less than 8 years old - if you were affected, still not changed car since ULEZ extension came in
That’s a pretty small voter demographic
One of the fears of the ULEZ was that the criteria would be tightened over time. So people with a compliant car now might worry that it could suddenly be non-compliant tomorrow.
well isnt that inevitable ? Once a threshold has been crossed the costs only go one way.
Yes. I was trying to be gentle about the point.
The end state for the ULEZ would be zero tailpipe emissions vehicles only.
I think Euro 6 as 'acceptable' for anti-pollution schemes is safe for an extended period of time. I bought my Euro 6 car with back in 2018 with such schemes in mind, with the intention of keeping it until electric cars become practical for my need. That could be 2030+.
The Euro 7 standard is not coming in even on new vehicles for several years.
The big cause on the pareto chart for pollution will be the remaining minority of pre-2016 vehicles, and blanket exemptions such as taxis which are allowed to continue to pollute. Plus the current level for petrol vehicles is several jumps away - is it currently Euro 4 ie 2006 registration.
That and targeting the need for a shift away from space inefficient forms of private transport to alternatives more suitable for cities.
London is continuing to invest, and imo will be OK, and Susan Hall will be marooned back in the 1980s somewhere.
IIRC the majority of pollution - especially particulates - comes from a minority of vehicles.
We should move to a more balanced scheme which encourages small vehicles. Too much of the taxation and "road calming" systems encourage large electric SUVs at the moment - very little taxation and they laugh at road humps.
Completely agreed, 100%. We have humps down my road which are a PITA even below let alone at the speed limit for my new, small, hybrid low-polluting vehicle but a large diesel SUV would would take with more ease. They should be completely abolished as a concept.
When it comes to particulates, the pareto principle comes into play. Taxis etc that are driving repeatedly around and around for hours a day emit far more emissions than private vehicles driving down a road twice a day. Yet too many schemes target the latter and not the former.
Exempting taxis etc from standards is utterly insane, they should have the highest standards, not the lowest.
Vehicle taxation should be a gradient, encouraging the lowest polluting vehicles, but with a slope, not a wall. For a number of years to come, the most accessible (price) vehicles will be hybrids. People should be rewarded more for swapping to hybrids from full ICE.
The London cabs are just starting to go electric - but they have rubbish range. By contrast the London minicabs are all electric or hybrid (pretty much).
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Thanks for confirming what I suspected. Should make interesting television. And if Sneaky Rishi decides to do it behind closed doors after dark he'll have to hope the reception committee in Kigali is equally discreet.
The flights are going to take off from Boscombe at Zero Dark 30 precisely because it's easier to isolate and conceal.
Surely the first flight will take off from City Airport complete with bunting, balloons, ticker tape and the Dagenham Girl Pipers.
Hmm, not one of the former RAF bases which is now an internment camp (or whatever they are called)? They have runways and all. Though presumably the lighting has been scrapped so it'd need to be in daytime ... not a good idea, on reflection.
We get this sort of religious shit from tube station operatives quite frequently on their marker pen whiteboards. Usually Christian texts, occasionally something Buddhist, but frankly it’s the same stuff. When they’re not writing live-laugh-love type self help messages
I suspect Isam is fine with Christian texts.
Don’t bother trying to bait me anymore, it’s so boring
Assuming the flights do start taking off, within a year or so we should anticipate some interesting Panorama documentaries and newspaper long reads.
Journalists will undoubtedly decide to follow a selection of asylum seekers on the journey and as they settle into their new lives. I would expect a mixture of: people making a fist of it in Rwanda and settling in; people sitting around idly with no prospect of work and becoming a burden for the Rwandan state; large numbers waiting a few weeks then setting out on the long journey back to Europe.
That last option seems pretty likely for most. What would I do if I’d tried to get to Britain then been sent to an unfamiliar new country? I’d immediately start on my second attempt. Would I stop short of Britain this time? Good question, I think that would depend heavily on whether I have relatives and friends to join there, and if I speak other languages.
Probably but the easier story will be how much the whole thing costs. "We're paying Rwanda £1 million per asylum seeker, who then try again". Just need to find someone in Calais who has previously been to Rwanda and the story writes itself.
Journalists will always go for the easiest story. That's why we have a thousand articles on hospital waiting lists to one analysis piece on how to improve healthcare. Which in turn leads to distortions in healthcare provision. Politicians pay attention to journalists.
I think Susan Hall will lose but might do a little better than her odds suggest. Am not a London-dweller these days, but ULEZ (which was a Conservative policy?) does seem to still motivate a great deal of anti-Khan feeling in the blue ‘burbs.
It’s not a dynamic or appealing contest though. Hopefully both parties are giving proper thought to their next candidate.
To be anti-ULEZ now it’s been implemented, you have to:
- Not believe the stats on the impact on air quality, or not care - Drive, and enjoy cars and driving - Not enjoy cars and driving enough to have a petrol car less than 20 years old or a diesel less than 8 years old - if you were affected, still not changed car since ULEZ extension came in
That’s a pretty small voter demographic
One of the fears of the ULEZ was that the criteria would be tightened over time. So people with a compliant car now might worry that it could suddenly be non-compliant tomorrow.
well isnt that inevitable ? Once a threshold has been crossed the costs only go one way.
Yes. I was trying to be gentle about the point.
The end state for the ULEZ would be zero tailpipe emissions vehicles only.
I think Euro 6 as 'acceptable' for anti-pollution schemes is safe for an extended period of time. I bought my Euro 6 car with back in 2018 with such schemes in mind, with the intention of keeping it until electric cars become practical for my need. That could be 2030+.
The Euro 7 standard is not coming in even on new vehicles for several years.
The big cause on the pareto chart for pollution will be the remaining minority of pre-2016 vehicles, and blanket exemptions such as taxis which are allowed to continue to pollute. Plus the current level for petrol vehicles is several jumps away - is it currently Euro 4 ie 2006 registration.
That and targeting the need for a shift away from space inefficient forms of private transport to alternatives more suitable for cities.
London is continuing to invest, and imo will be OK, and Susan Hall will be marooned back in the 1980s somewhere.
IIRC the majority of pollution - especially particulates - comes from a minority of vehicles.
We should move to a more balanced scheme which encourages small vehicles. Too much of the taxation and "road calming" systems encourage large electric SUVs at the moment - very little taxation and they laugh at road humps.
Completely agreed, 100%. We have humps down my road which are a PITA even below let alone at the speed limit for my new, small, hybrid low-polluting vehicle but a large diesel SUV would would take with more ease. They should be completely abolished as a concept.
When it comes to particulates, the pareto principle comes into play. Taxis etc that are driving repeatedly around and around for hours a day emit far more emissions than private vehicles driving down a road twice a day. Yet too many schemes target the latter and not the former.
Exempting taxis etc from standards is utterly insane, they should have the highest standards, not the lowest.
Banning speed bumps, or banning SUVs?
The only surprise is that mandatory GPS speed limiters on new cars haven't become a thing yet. Would make Wales' 20mph policy much more effective, could use it to taper down motorway speeds as you approach congestion etc etc
Anecdata that might be of some small comfort to Number 10: I've not picked up any hostility to Rishi personally or even as Prime Minister.
Well I certainly have, and not just from my tory-voting blue wall friend either.
Lots of people I know think he’s godawful and useless. My LibDem leaning, but sometime tory voting, brother can’t stand Sunak especially his parroting nonsense and bizarre fixation with sending people off to Rwanda. He think Sunak’s gone potty.
The polls back me up on this. Sunak is immensely unpopular.
Thinking the Prime Minister is useless does not necessarily mean people are hostile to him; they might be indifferent. If you are right then replacing the leader will improve the party's prospects. If I'm right, it will be futile.
Replacing the leader will be futile. The problem is the Conservative *brand*, not *just* Sunak. A good leader, given time, could fix the brand (*). But Sunak is not a good leader; the party is not in the mood to be led, and there is no time.
(*) As Hague and IDS did not, but Howard and Cameron did.
This is exactly it. Nobody know what they stand for or what you could get if voting for them. It spans big state one nation blairism, blood and soil ethnonationalism, or radical libertarianism. It is freaking bonkers the range of possible outcomes you could get. And, of course, because they contain such radical ideological divergence, their majority is utterly useless.... they cannot enact anything. I am astounded that 1/5 of the population is willing to vote for this dumpster fire. Surely it can only be due to unthinking habitation over many decades that keeps even these voters locked in 🤷
On the other hand, we have little idea what Starmer will do with his stonking majority. There seem to be lots of "don't frighten the horses!" small change rhetoric, but there's a good chance Starmer will be much braver than Blair was when faced with a large majority.
What is 'Starmerism'?
Didn't you read the leading telegraph article today. Reeves is giving the Maise Lecture today.
No, I didn't. It's paywalled, so I could only read the first couple of lines.
But there's one thing I'd say: if she's really aiming for a decade of renewal, then it's a positive thing, as few politicians ever look beyond the next electoral cycle. Although I'd prefer two decades.
You believe it’s more than a nice phrase?
If Labour get the stonking majority I think they'll get, then they'll have enough room for brave, long-term thinking and planning.
Things Blair lacked.
Having the room is not the same as taking advantage of it
No but it’s pretty desperate stuff on here from the remaining right wingers that they think Labour will fail.
It may take a long time to fix things, and I’m not now sure Labour will get this country back on track, but compared to the horror show of the last 5 years it may seem like sunlit uplands once more.
The tories could be out of power for a very, very, long time.
Tories will still be in power after GE2024
Most likely SirKidStarver and Auterity Reeves Tories in power.
I don't think it is useful calling SKS's Labour Tories - they may be as economically right wing as Cameronite and Osbournite Tories were, but there are some (troubling) key differences.
SKS is a petty authoritarian in ways that some Tories, most notably Cameron, just aren't. I am still of the belief that if he wins a large enough majority he will just remove the whip from anyone on the left of the party at the first opportunity, as he has done as LOTO.
He will likely keep and expand the anti protest laws the current crop of Tories have brought in, and will likely do Blairist "nanny state" sort of regulations that are atypical for the Tory party. I also think that SKS's Labour will be much more technocratic than Tories tend to be - especially with their words of warmth towards AI being involved in NHS triaging and the like. The same Blairite mentality that proliferated CCTV cameras in the UK will similarly inform SKS's policies for the worse.
You make a shockingly good point which I hadn't thought of.........
Maybe that's the way for Rishi to get his Mojo back....
'Vote Starmer even more authoritarian than we are!' or
It'd be a miracle if Susan Hall won in London (has anyone seen or heard an interview with her, I don't mean for rarity but for how it actually went?) but there are a few women on the Tory back benches who were actually elected on the strength of the red wall/brexit who are on a par with her. Compared to them, Rishi seems like a genius.
I’m seeing lots of YouTube videos for her campaign in recent days. The usual one is going on about ULEZ.
It'd be a miracle if Susan Hall won in London (has anyone seen or heard an interview with her, I don't mean for rarity but for how it actually went?) but there are a few women on the Tory back benches who were actually elected on the strength of the red wall/brexit who are on a par with her. Compared to them, Rishi seems like a genius.
I’m seeing lots of YouTube videos for her campaign in recent days. The usual one is going on about ULEZ.
Good morning everyone; brighter and indeed spring like today.
As someone who lives outside London, and rarely drives into it, and if he does uses a three-year-old car, what is the problem with ULEZ? Surely reducing emissions is a good thing?
The Ulex is rarely if ever mentioned in London now. People have rapidly got used to it. The idea that it is some hot issue is completely ludicrous.
We get this sort of religious shit from tube station operatives quite frequently on their marker pen whiteboards. Usually Christian texts, occasionally something Buddhist, but frankly it’s the same stuff. When they’re not writing live-laugh-love type self help messages
I suspect Isam is fine with Christian texts.
Don’t bother trying to bait me anymore, it’s so boring
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Thanks for confirming what I suspected. Should make interesting television. And if Sneaky Rishi decides to do it behind closed doors after dark he'll have to hope the reception committee in Kigali is equally discreet.
The flights are going to take off from Boscombe at Zero Dark 30 precisely because it's easier to isolate and conceal.
Surely the first flight will take off from City Airport complete with bunting, balloons, ticker tape and the Dagenham Girl Pipers.
Hmm, not one of the former RAF bases which is now an internment camp (or whatever they are called)? They have runways and all. Though presumably the lighting has been scrapped so it'd need to be in daytime ... not a good idea, on reflection.
You mean like Scampton and with a Red Arrows fly past too.
We get this sort of religious shit from tube station operatives quite frequently on their marker pen whiteboards. Usually Christian texts, occasionally something Buddhist, but frankly it’s the same stuff. When they’re not writing live-laugh-love type self help messages
I suspect Isam is fine with Christian texts.
Love thy neighbour/be kind and that sort of thing is fine, surely. Most major religions have something like that. Might not always practice it, but that's humans being humans.
I think Susan Hall will lose but might do a little better than her odds suggest. Am not a London-dweller these days, but ULEZ (which was a Conservative policy?) does seem to still motivate a great deal of anti-Khan feeling in the blue ‘burbs.
It’s not a dynamic or appealing contest though. Hopefully both parties are giving proper thought to their next candidate.
To be anti-ULEZ now it’s been implemented, you have to:
- Not believe the stats on the impact on air quality, or not care - Drive, and enjoy cars and driving - Not enjoy cars and driving enough to have a petrol car less than 20 years old or a diesel less than 8 years old - if you were affected, still not changed car since ULEZ extension came in
That’s a pretty small voter demographic
One of the fears of the ULEZ was that the criteria would be tightened over time. So people with a compliant car now might worry that it could suddenly be non-compliant tomorrow.
well isnt that inevitable ? Once a threshold has been crossed the costs only go one way.
Yes. I was trying to be gentle about the point.
The end state for the ULEZ would be zero tailpipe emissions vehicles only.
I think Euro 6 as 'acceptable' for anti-pollution schemes is safe for an extended period of time. I bought my Euro 6 car with back in 2018 with such schemes in mind, with the intention of keeping it until electric cars become practical for my need. That could be 2030+.
The Euro 7 standard is not coming in even on new vehicles for several years.
The big cause on the pareto chart for pollution will be the remaining minority of pre-2016 vehicles, and blanket exemptions such as taxis which are allowed to continue to pollute. Plus the current level for petrol vehicles is several jumps away - is it currently Euro 4 ie 2006 registration.
That and targeting the need for a shift away from space inefficient forms of private transport to alternatives more suitable for cities.
London is continuing to invest, and imo will be OK, and Susan Hall will be marooned back in the 1980s somewhere.
IIRC the majority of pollution - especially particulates - comes from a minority of vehicles.
We should move to a more balanced scheme which encourages small vehicles. Too much of the taxation and "road calming" systems encourage large electric SUVs at the moment - very little taxation and they laugh at road humps.
Completely agreed, 100%. We have humps down my road which are a PITA even below let alone at the speed limit for my new, small, hybrid low-polluting vehicle but a large diesel SUV would would take with more ease. They should be completely abolished as a concept.
When it comes to particulates, the pareto principle comes into play. Taxis etc that are driving repeatedly around and around for hours a day emit far more emissions than private vehicles driving down a road twice a day. Yet too many schemes target the latter and not the former.
Exempting taxis etc from standards is utterly insane, they should have the highest standards, not the lowest.
Banning speed bumps, or banning SUVs?
The only surprise is that mandatory GPS speed limiters on new cars haven't become a thing yet. Would make Wales' 20mph policy much more effective, could use it to taper down motorway speeds as you approach congestion etc etc
Speed humps, especially speed humps that inconvenience small cars travelling at or below the speed limit, they're a stupid, stupid idea.
Automated speed tools on new cars are a good idea, but they only work best (at least for mine) above 20mph. I drive with adaptive cruise control on and set to the speed limit so it will maintain speed automatically at the speed limit, and if the car in front of me brakes suddenly, then my car will automatically break and speed back up as appropriate.
The ACC needs a minimum speed of 20mph though. The lowest it can be set to is 25mph, but if the car in front slows to 21 then it adapts, but once it drops to 20mph then I get a beep and I need to start using the pedals again.
It's all boiling down to Rwanda for Rishi, isn't it. Can he get a flight off with a refugee onboard? Preferably a young male one who looks a bit edgy. If he can he collects £1000 from Piers Morgan and - just possibly - turns this whole thing around.
Has anyone considered the practicalities of flying a jumbo full of reluctant passengers?
That's the not the hard part. The formula is well proven and I saw it work in Iraq on detainees who were actual jihadis and a lot more punchy than your basic cross-channel fugee.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Thanks for confirming what I suspected. Should make interesting television. And if Sneaky Rishi decides to do it behind closed doors after dark he'll have to hope the reception committee in Kigali is equally discreet.
The flights are going to take off from Boscombe at Zero Dark 30 precisely because it's easier to isolate and conceal.
Surely the first flight will take off from City Airport complete with bunting, balloons, ticker tape and the Dagenham Girl Pipers.
Hmm, not one of the former RAF bases which is now an internment camp (or whatever they are called)? They have runways and all. Though presumably the lighting has been scrapped so it'd need to be in daytime ... not a good idea, on reflection.
You mean like Scampton and with a Red Arrows fly past too.
Manston might be worth looking at, come to think of it. Edit: wouldn't surprise me.
Perhaps Sunak's cunning plan is to get a flight off to Rwanda in April and make sure that Susan Hall is on it. Then find somebody sane to be the Tory candidate for London mayor. They'd probably go for Andrew Rosindell, though.
Point is, of course, that Manafort laundered Russian money, was indicted and convicted for doing so - and was then pardoned by Trump. Who is now re-employing him.
If he were to repeat the process and help Trump get elected with Russian money, presumably he's get pardoned all over again.
Comments
A photograph of Queen Elizabeth II surrounded by her grandchildren and great-grandchildren, taken by the Princess of Wales, was “digitally enhanced at source”, a global picture agency has said.
The photo, taken at Balmoral in August 2022, was reviewed by Getty Images after the Princess admitted that she had edited a Mother’s Day picture of herself and her three children.
Buckingham Palace released it on April 21 last year to mark what would have been the late Queen’s 97th birthday.
A spokesman for Getty said: “Getty Images has reviewed the image in question and placed an editor’s note on it, stating that the image has been digitally enhanced at source.”
Close inspection of the picture appears to show several inconsistencies, including a vertical line where the tartan of the late Queen’s skirt does not match.
A dark shadow is visible behind Prince Louis’s ear, and a similar small black patch can be seen behind Prince George’s shirt collar. There are also signs of digital repetition of Mia Tindall’s hair.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2024/03/18/second-royal-portrait-was-manipulated/
I shall now watch as we fk up get RR mini nuke stations going. Something where we have a lead and could create genuine green jobs, but well hand it over to the civil servants and the protestors.
We should move to a more balanced scheme which encourages small vehicles. Too much of the taxation and "road calming" systems encourage large electric SUVs at the moment - very little taxation and they laugh at road humps.
https://www.racingpost.com/news/ireland/i-want-to-make-a-difference-and-ensure-a-bright-future-for-all-nina-carberry-set-to-enter-politics-ag78K5e112Eq/
I'll guess that they're political moderates disgusted with the politicians in WDC.
3% of Dems regard Israel as the USA's greatest enemy and another 3% view Ukraine - illustrating the unpleasant extremes some 'progressives' wallow in.
Overall Ukraine having a net of +30 and Russia of -78 is a good sign.
Brexit was a big foreign news story some years ago, a bit like Zika virus. If you mention it to people they say 'oh yes that was a big problem in Brazil (Britain) a few years ago, have they dealt with it now, or is it still causing problems?'
Make that last what you will!
Starmer's single best piece of good fortune is the passing of a long time since Labour had a chance to run the country. Iraq, Afghanistan and bank collapse are a long time ago.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0Hr7W_B4oc
[1] For example he counted the number of bombs each aircraft dropped and the drop interval, compared it to the real thing and noted the difference in bomb damage implied by them.
I thought that the "Starmer is actually running the country" thing was a bizarro righty thing.
Pump them full of sedatives, adult nappy, hooded, shackled, one security contractor per passenger on the flight. Easy.
Yes there is. Scenario:
Rishi goes to the 1922 committee tomorrow after 2 more days of relentless kite flying ("are you a horse") of potential replacements. 2 more days of political and intellectual giants like Jonathan Gullis mouthing off on the WhatsApp group.
In summary, the meeting is an utter car crash. The divide both between Sunak and his remaining loyalists and the various groups of racists, fruit cakes and loonies who make up Tory backbenchers is catastrophically wide.
Sunak realises that he will be ousted in May, or at least they will come for him. The grand plan - win London, make people understand he's made them better off and that Starmer has no plan, followed by another tax cut bonanza and then a November repeat of 1992 - is done.
And so after a night of wakeful sleep he instructs the palace to set up a meeting with Chaz and off we go.
I don't expect this will happen. But it could. In this febrile atmosphere anything could happen. And the date that parliament has to dissolve itself for a 2nd May election is Tuesday 26th March...
"Trump Is not being fair to the younger crooks, these young traitors and fraudsters deserve a chance"
https://twitter.com/jeffstorobinsky/status/1769900381943783601
Rachel Reeves says Labour wants ‘inclusive’ version of ‘decade of renewal’ that followed Thatcher’s election in 1979
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2024/mar/19/rachel-reeves-labour-rishi-sunak-keir-starmer-uk-politics-live-latest-news-updates
But a one-club golfer like the current UK Government / current version of the Conservative Party, only has one golf club - by definition.
What else are they going to do?
Despite the polls, the notion of the Tories coming 3rd - or 4th - feels fanciful. Until you consider the impact of ReFUK. Farage now strongly rumoured to be stepping back in - and with his GBeebies presence he isn't exactly invisible as it is.
How do we go 1979 > 1997 > Canada 93? Nigel Farage leads ReFUK with his usual simplicity of thought and panache and the remaining Tory vote collapses. And they can't even buy him off. Why be bought off with baubles now when he can have the whole thing in a few months?
Supposedly Michael O'Leary is all in favour.
Another beautiful Spring morning here in the Queen of Welsh holiday resorts as I continue my progress since my pacemaker 6 weeks ago today by striming and cutting part of our front lawn
The birds are busy in our shrubs holding their daily discussions over nesting materials, the gulls look to last years nest on a nearby neighbour's roof, the pigeons are cooing and let's us never forget life is precious and nature continues despise man's inhumanity to man
And just saw the tiniest of ladybirds - wonderful and the perfect antidote to the toxicity of Trump, Farage and the right
https://twitter.com/ET_Californian/status/1769945380731437294/photo/1
Nor indeed religion.
He has had to a couple of practice runs to remote European airports without any detainees onboard but other than that. it's (our) money for nothing.
Mention 'Rwanda and the Boats' and people laugh!
It's like 'There's a sale on at DFS'
- The 1970s were dominated by Labour governments struggling with industrial relations (actually the 70s were shared between both parties facing the same issues)
- Blair was wildly popular before the 1997 election
- Blair’s popularity suddenly slumped after Iraq
- Britain voted in 1979 for a radical sea change in economic policy (that’s what they got, but there were few overt signs)
- Kinnock’s Sheffield rally lost him the 1992 election (evidence suggests it was the “tax bombshell”)
Journalists will undoubtedly decide to follow a selection of asylum seekers on the journey and as they settle into their new lives. I would expect a mixture of: people making a fist of it in Rwanda and settling in; people sitting around idly with no prospect of work and becoming a burden for the Rwandan state; large numbers waiting a few weeks then setting out on the long journey back to Europe.
That last option seems pretty likely for most. What would I do if I’d tried to get to Britain then been sent to an unfamiliar new country? I’d immediately start on my second attempt. Would I stop short of Britain this time? Good question, I think that would depend heavily on whether I have relatives and friends to join there, and if I speak other languages.
What suckahs they were!
Hmm, fair enough on ASCII representation though it rather dismisses Leon's claim chatGPT taught itself how to draw, but what an interesting ASCII way of representing 4 blue and 3 green tokens.
But there is a reasonable chance that Starmer will prove to be a transformative PM. I think he would like to be and the country is in such deep doodoo at the moment that even modest progress could seem transformational. He will stop the absurd merry go round of ministers coming and going (average length of service of a minister under the Tories - 8 months!) and the government will come up with a clear programme of policies which it genuinely believes to be in the national interest (which the Tories have not done since about 2013). And it would be reasonable to assume that some of these policies will have a positive impact. If he can combine this with a way of getting the economy growing (big if I know) the stage will be set for him to take more radical steps, which I would expect to include much tougher regulation of privatised utilities, moves to shift taxation away from income and on to wealth, and a much closer relationship with the EU.
But maybe we could get something going in Rwanda?
King's Cross main concourse this morning:
https://x.com/surplustakes/status/1770020025945948164?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
So we had a series of "government loses by-election - they will lose the next election for sure", followed by "we was robbed again".
Good luck with that plan. While they have *some* social protection, IIRC, it is contribution based eligibility.
When it comes to particulates, the pareto principle comes into play. Taxis etc that are driving repeatedly around and around for hours a day emit far more emissions than private vehicles driving down a road twice a day. Yet too many schemes target the latter and not the former.
Exempting taxis etc from standards is utterly insane, they should have the highest standards, not the lowest.
"I've committed 47 murders this morning. But I repented of each and every one. Immediately. Yay me!"
Religion shouldn't be in public spaces.
The London cabs are just starting to go electric - but they have rubbish range. By contrast the London minicabs are all electric or hybrid (pretty much).
Journalists will always go for the easiest story. That's why we have a thousand articles on hospital waiting lists to one analysis piece on how to improve healthcare. Which in turn leads to distortions in healthcare provision. Politicians pay attention to journalists.
The only surprise is that mandatory GPS speed limiters on new cars haven't become a thing yet. Would make Wales' 20mph policy much more effective, could use it to taper down motorway speeds as you approach congestion etc etc
Maybe that's the way for Rishi to get his Mojo back....
'Vote Starmer even more authoritarian than we are!' or
'Want the Stasi as your neighbour vote Labour!'
Automated speed tools on new cars are a good idea, but they only work best (at least for mine) above 20mph. I drive with adaptive cruise control on and set to the speed limit so it will maintain speed automatically at the speed limit, and if the car in front of me brakes suddenly, then my car will automatically break and speed back up as appropriate.
The ACC needs a minimum speed of 20mph though. The lowest it can be set to is 25mph, but if the car in front slows to 21 then it adapts, but once it drops to 20mph then I get a beep and I need to start using the pedals again.
They'd probably go for Andrew Rosindell, though.
Who is now re-employing him.
If he were to repeat the process and help Trump get elected with Russian money, presumably he's get pardoned all over again.