politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

Has Rayner cost Labour the votes of short men? – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,159
edited May 12 in General
Has Rayner cost Labour the votes of short men? – politicalbetting.com

Scenes in the Commons, where Angela Rayner has just called Rishi Sunak a "pint-size loser" #pmqs pic.twitter.com/2ujVX2RvFZ

Read the full story here

«134567

Comments

  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,722
    edited April 25
    Yes. Short people are very sensitive about their height.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,616
    If I don't make John Rentoul's QTWTAIN list I will be extremely disappointed.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,978
    @ringwodian

    A lot of Tories seem to be getting upset about Angela Rayner quoting Nadine Dorries today.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,402
    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,858
    This is one of the last remaining "acceptable" prejudices. Ironically, another is red hair.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,616
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    This is one of the last remaining "acceptable" prejudices. Ironically, another is red hair.

    The last acceptable prejudice is towards the privately educated.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,858
    IPL: The batting blitz turning cricket into baseball
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-68872429
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,775
    Good morning, everyone.

    Rayner was and is an obnoxious oaf. What people see in her, as a positive, is beyond me.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,978
    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    She was quoting Nadine Dorries
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,978
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Good morning, everyone.

    Rayner was and is an obnoxious oaf. What people see in her, as a positive, is beyond me.

    What does that say about Nadine?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,616
    edited April 25
    Scott_xP said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    She was quoting Nadine Dorries
    The fantasist and smearer Nadine Dorries.

    That's not a good thing.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,402
    Scott_xP said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    She was quoting Nadine Dorries
    So what? She was revelling in the repetition.

    And she's said "Tory Scum" in the past, which was entirely her own.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,546
    Scott_xP said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    She was quoting Nadine Dorries
    And your point is? I daresay we can find plenty of 'nasty' quotes from Labourites about Rayner (or Starmer, etc). That doesn't make it correct to repeat those nasty quotes.

    As I said yesterday, I don't think it'll shift votes. It does firm up my view that Rayner's more of a liability than a benefit to Labour's front bench, though.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,615
    It's time #PMQs was abolished. It has degenerated into a series of scripted one liners from teenage SPADS and planted questions. Gulis opening "question" was risible. No PM answers the questions. The speaker never tries to compel them to do so. We need a better form of accountability, such as an expanded role for the Liason Committee.

    Rayners comment was below the belt, but hit home. The "pint-sized" descriptor was less damaging than "loser", which the voters and MPs know to be true. Sunak is at his worst when he loses his temper, he won't respond well to it.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,043
    Just ban it.

    Cakes and drinks sweetener neotame can damage gut wall, scientists find
    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/apr/24/cakes-and-drinks-sweetener-neotame-e961-can-damage-gut-wall-scientists-find
    ..Even a low intake of neotame might be harmful, Chichger stressed. “Even when we studied neotame at very low concentrations, 10 times lower than the acceptable daily intake, we saw the breakdown of the gut barrier and a shift in bacteria to a more damaging behaviour, including increased invasion of healthy gut cells leading to cell death. This can be linked to issues such as irritable bowel diseases and sepsis,” she said.

    The European Food Safety Authority ruled in 2010 that neotame was “safe for use”. It has since been approved for use in more than 35 countries. But Efsa is now reviewing the safety of neotame as part of what Chichger said is a series of evidence-based risk assessments which may lead to a reassessment of certain sweeteners...

    The interaction of artificial sweeteners with the gut microbiome needs a great deal more study.

  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,775
    Mr. xP, much the same.

    And quoting someone is a feeble excuse, especially from someone who derided political opponents as 'scum' and had to have an apology dragged out of her.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,361
    edited April 25
    Scott_xP said:

    @ringwodian

    A lot of Tories seem to be getting upset about Angela Rayner quoting Nadine Dorries today.

    It's woman of the people, Ange. She can say what she wants. Be as rude as she wants. It doesn't matter. She's authentic and down wiv da working class. She is the beating heart of the red wall.

    According to middle class, white, centrist dad commentators and hacks on twitter.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,546
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    This is one of the last remaining "acceptable" prejudices. Ironically, another is red hair.

    My ex was a redhead, and she suffered at school because of it. I wonder if Rayner suffered similarly?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,895
    Briefly back onto the end of the last thread - why are the PB Tory Ultras so upset by the implementation of the Williams-Shapps Plan for Rail? Shapps was the TORY SofS, its YOUR plan.

    Costs need to be cut, and the current direct award contracts add no value for the % they consume. Removing them makes sense to anyone other than a rampant ideologue which is why the Tories proposed it.

    The obvious next step is to accelerate a new program of train building. Tory incompetence also cost us the Derby factory until they (finally) accepted they needed to place an order or lose it. Capacity is the issue and there aren't the additional paths available, so run longer trains. Make the railways usable again and passengers come back, revenues go up and costs per mile go down.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,722
    Yes
    Scott_xP said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    She was quoting Nadine Dorries
    Noone care who she was quoting.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,797
    What yesterday's Punch and Judy show demonstrated is that there is a serious drop in quality from the leaders to their deputies. Which is, given the quality of the leaders, a source of genuine concern.

    I don't believe that this sort of nonsense will shift any votes other than possibly to the DNV party.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,546
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. xP, much the same.

    And quoting someone is a feeble excuse, especially from someone who derided political opponents as 'scum' and had to have an apology dragged out of her.

    It was amusing to see people on here laud Rayner over that apology, and say how sincere it was. Except the apology was a month after the comment; after she had doubled-down on her original comment, and after a Tory MP had been murdered. There was nothing genuine about the apology, as yesterday shows. She's just nasty.

    But sometimes nasty works in politics.
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,207
    Much more relevant was the question from Jeff Smith;

    When it eventually came to Smith’s turn, he simply and quietly asked Dowden the following: “He praised the prime minister for restoring stability. Who does he think caused the instability?”

    The deputy prime minister knew he’d been clean bowled. He did his very best oleaginous smile, but the middle stump was out of the ground.

    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/6d3da246-f40e-4723-a0e4-694d5b53090

    Which is why Rishi was doomed from the beginning.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,859
    edited April 25
    Foxy said:

    It's time #PMQs was abolished. It has degenerated into a series of scripted one liners from teenage SPADS and planted questions. Gulis opening "question" was risible. No PM answers the questions. The speaker never tries to compel them to do so. We need a better form of accountability, such as an expanded role for the Liason Committee.

    Rayners comment was below the belt, but hit home. The "pint-sized" descriptor was less damaging than "loser", which the voters and MPs know to be true. Sunak is at his worst when he loses his temper, he won't respond well to it.

    +1 It’s an embarrassment, which simply serves to bring our politics into disrepute. The politicians themselves might enjoy it, but they should think again, as the widely-held view that our parliamentarians behave like school children stems principally from people catching a glimpse of PMQs.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,361
    Foxy said:

    It's time #PMQs was abolished. It has degenerated into a series of scripted one liners from teenage SPADS and planted questions. Gulis opening "question" was risible. No PM answers the questions. The speaker never tries to compel them to do so. We need a better form of accountability, such as an expanded role for the Liason Committee.

    Rayners comment was below the belt, but hit home. The "pint-sized" descriptor was less damaging than "loser", which the voters and MPs know to be true. Sunak is at his worst when he loses his temper, he won't respond well to it.

    PMQ's, as I said in a different thread, I have long since stopped watching for precisely that reason. A tedious exchange that offers nothing.

    "May I ask the PM why the govt is so brilliant and the opposition so shit?" and vice versa. It would be barely watchable if you had two charismatic engaging characters in the lead roles rather than charisma bypasses.

    As for Rayner, as we know from here and social media, she can do no wrong so her insult will be perfectly acceptable to people who would be outraged if it was from the other side. Obviously the same applies in reverse.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,722
    Note that Scott xp is trying to deflect her unpleasantness by saying Dorries said it first. So what....
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,043
    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    Agreed that it's not to be applauded.

    Even if it was indeed a former government front bencher who coined the phrase in respect of Sunak.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,895
    edited April 25
    squareroot2 said:

    Yes

    Scott_xP said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    She was quoting Nadine Dorries
    Noone care who she was quoting.
    Yes we do - that's why it was funny. Rayner calls the PM a pint-sized loser? probably a scandal. Unparliamentary behaviour, Speaker tells her off. But quoting former Tory cabinet members who sat with the PM in cabinet for years?

    Had no idea the remaining PB Tory Ultras were such fans of cancel culture.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    RochdalePioneers said:

    squareroot2 said:

    Yes

    Scott_xP said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    She was quoting Nadine Dorries
    Noone care who she was quoting.
    Yes we do - that's why it was funny. Rayner calls the PM a pint-sized loser? probably a scandal. Unparliamentary behaviour, Speaker tells her off. But quoting former Tory cabinet members who sat with the PM in cabinet for years?

    Had no idea the remaining PB Tory Ultras were such fans of cancel culture.
    So many snowflakes for so late in the year.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,616
    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    This is one of the last remaining "acceptable" prejudices. Ironically, another is red hair.

    My ex was a redhead, and she suffered at school because of it. I wonder if Rayner suffered similarly?
    More than likely.

    I have a weakness for redheads, each one of them was bullied for being a soulless ginger.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,402
    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @ringwodian

    A lot of Tories seem to be getting upset about Angela Rayner quoting Nadine Dorries today.

    It's woman of the people, Ange. She can say what she wants. Be as rude as she wants. It doesn't matter. She's authentic and down wiv da working class. She is the beating heart of the red wall.

    According to middle class, white, centrist dad commentators and hacks on twitter.
    Excellent post, sums it up completely.
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,978
    The pearl-clutching on here this morning confirms what a smart political operator she is, and why the Tories fear her
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,616
    How can I quit this website when it still has exchanges like this?



    https://twitter.com/MuseZack/status/1783156653246017923/photo/1
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,950
    squareroot2 said:

    Yes. Short people are very sensitive about their height.

    The touchy little fckrs.

    Anyway..

    https://youtu.be/8bfyS-S-IJs?si=HfRPxyevbgI8r-O-
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,043
    North Korea, Iran deepen partnership through missile tech exchange
    https://m.koreatimes.co.kr/pages/article.asp?newsIdx=373421
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,414
    JosiasJessop said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    This is one of the last remaining "acceptable" prejudices. Ironically, another is red hair.

    My ex was a redhead, and she suffered at school because of it. I wonder if Rayner suffered similarly?
    Morning all!

    I’m 5 foot six, and Mrs. OKC was a redhead back in the day. Should that make me ….. us….. aggressive and resentful?
    I don’t think I am, and my wife certainly isn’t.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,402
    Nigelb said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    Agreed that it's not to be applauded.

    Even if it was indeed a former government front bencher who coined the phrase in respect of Sunak.
    I should add, in the interests of balance, that Cameron once made an oblique joke about John Bercow's height by referencing to the Seven Dwarfs as well.

    As dislikeable as Bercow is that wasn't in order or Prime Ministerial either.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,361
    JosiasJessop said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    She was quoting Nadine Dorries
    And your point is? I daresay we can find plenty of 'nasty' quotes from Labourites about Rayner (or Starmer, etc). That doesn't make it correct to repeat those nasty quotes.

    As I said yesterday, I don't think it'll shift votes. It does firm up my view that Rayner's more of a liability than a benefit to Labour's front bench, though.
    I think so too. She is certainly not an asset. The people who mainly seem to think she is an asset and an asset with the red wall are people who would only know the red wall from looking at a map. Journalists and Daytime TV talking heads predominantly.

    I doubt she has any name recognition in many of these places. Most politicians don't. I live in a red wall area. I doubt anyone here cares a toss about her and I would say the same applies on the opposite end of the political spectrum with someone like Lee Anderson too who is presented as a voice of the Red Wall by his side.

    I suspect both politicians are rather enamoured with the media view of themselves and reality is somewhat different.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,043
    The mystery of Plato’s final resting place appears to have been solved after advanced scanning techniques dubbed a “bionic eye” were able to penetrate a 2,000-year-old carbonised scroll...
    https://twitter.com/archeohistories/status/1783234604343943223
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,858
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    This is one of the last remaining "acceptable" prejudices. Ironically, another is red hair.

    The last acceptable prejudice is towards the privately educated.
    True that. Opinion polls are clear that voters want to replace our privately educated Prime Minister with a state educated one. Mind you, the last time we tried that experiment, the lettuce won.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,616
    Casino_Royale said:

    Nigelb said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    Agreed that it's not to be applauded.

    Even if it was indeed a former government front bencher who coined the phrase in respect of Sunak.
    I should add, in the interests of balance, that Cameron once made an oblique joke about John Bercow's height by referencing to the Seven Dwarfs as well.

    As dislikeable as Bercow is that wasn't in order or Prime Ministerial either.
    In Dave's defence there was a lot of provocation from Bercow that we never saw publicly.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,546
    Foxy said:

    It's time #PMQs was abolished. It has degenerated into a series of scripted one liners from teenage SPADS and planted questions. Gulis opening "question" was risible. No PM answers the questions. The speaker never tries to compel them to do so. We need a better form of accountability, such as an expanded role for the Liason Committee.

    Rayners comment was below the belt, but hit home. The "pint-sized" descriptor was less damaging than "loser", which the voters and MPs know to be true. Sunak is at his worst when he loses his temper, he won't respond well to it.

    Nah. If you go on Twatter, it's the 'pint-sized' part that people seem to concentrate on.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652
    I don't think it will move the dial in the slightest. It will just annoy all the people it was intended to annoy. British politics is utterly debased in just about every way.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,858
    edited April 25
    Speaking of Nadine Dorries, Channel 4 News compiled this handy cut out and keep guide to MPs who have lost the whip or left parliament.

    Why 36 MPs have quit or been suspended since the last election
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQ5DV6xwU4A
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652
    JosiasJessop said:

    Foxy said:

    It's time #PMQs was abolished. It has degenerated into a series of scripted one liners from teenage SPADS and planted questions. Gulis opening "question" was risible. No PM answers the questions. The speaker never tries to compel them to do so. We need a better form of accountability, such as an expanded role for the Liason Committee.

    Rayners comment was below the belt, but hit home. The "pint-sized" descriptor was less damaging than "loser", which the voters and MPs know to be true. Sunak is at his worst when he loses his temper, he won't respond well to it.

    Nah. If you go on Twatter, it's the 'pint-sized' part that people seem to concentrate on.

    Twitter is not the real world.

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,616
    Looks like Humza Yousaf isn’t going to wait for the Scottish Greens to decide if they still want to be part of his government. Cabinet to meet in the next hour…

    The Bute House Agreement seems about to break

    https://twitter.com/PGourtsoyannis/status/1783382183937266072
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,895
    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,775
    Mr. Royale, I thought that wa sa backbencher, and outside the Commons?
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,207
    IanB2 said:

    Foxy said:

    It's time #PMQs was abolished. It has degenerated into a series of scripted one liners from teenage SPADS and planted questions. Gulis opening "question" was risible. No PM answers the questions. The speaker never tries to compel them to do so. We need a better form of accountability, such as an expanded role for the Liason Committee.

    Rayners comment was below the belt, but hit home. The "pint-sized" descriptor was less damaging than "loser", which the voters and MPs know to be true. Sunak is at his worst when he loses his temper, he won't respond well to it.

    +1 It’s an embarrassment, which simply serves to bring our politics into disrepute. The politicians themselves might enjoy it, but they should think again, as the widely-held view that our parliamentarians behave like school children stems principally from people catching a glimpse of PMQs.
    Ties in with the Chums theory that the most dangerous union in the UK is the Oxford Union.

    All this debating society for grown ups stuff might be tremendous fun for participants, but does it really lead to better governance?

    (Half-formed theory: it did in the past, while it was unconscious. Now it's more deliberate, and the winners are those who game the game best, not those who actually play it best. The same might be true in other areas.)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,546
    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    He sounded fine on the radio to me. Unlike Rayner, who stumbled over words on a few occasions.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,722
    Every time Rayner opens her mouth she says something absurd. She going to be like John Prescott who was equally loathable but Blair kept him to keep the left under control.

  • TazTaz Posts: 14,361
    Casino_Royale said:

    Nigelb said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    Just trying to imagine the opprobrium if someone from the Government front bench had made a similar comment about a Labour frontbencher.

    I suspect we'd get all sorts of comments about the nasty Tories and discrimination.

    Agreed that it's not to be applauded.

    Even if it was indeed a former government front bencher who coined the phrase in respect of Sunak.
    I should add, in the interests of balance, that Cameron once made an oblique joke about John Bercow's height by referencing to the Seven Dwarfs as well.

    As dislikeable as Bercow is that wasn't in order or Prime Ministerial either.
    He also referred to Dorries as being frustrated.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,858
    squareroot2 said:

    Note that Scott xp is trying to deflect her unpleasantness by saying Dorries said it first. So what....

    The point is that Conservative MPs will have recognised the quotation. It is Labour strategy to undermine the Prime Minister among the backbenchers who have the power to oust him.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 42,546
    SouthamObserver said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Foxy said:

    It's time #PMQs was abolished. It has degenerated into a series of scripted one liners from teenage SPADS and planted questions. Gulis opening "question" was risible. No PM answers the questions. The speaker never tries to compel them to do so. We need a better form of accountability, such as an expanded role for the Liason Committee.

    Rayners comment was below the belt, but hit home. The "pint-sized" descriptor was less damaging than "loser", which the voters and MPs know to be true. Sunak is at his worst when he loses his temper, he won't respond well to it.

    Nah. If you go on Twatter, it's the 'pint-sized' part that people seem to concentrate on.

    Twitter is not the real world.
    No, but then what other evidence is there that the assertion @Foxy made is correct?
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,352
    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    DPM is a non-job. It's the archetypal non-job.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,775
    Mr. Pioneers, 'cancel warriors'?

    You understand it's legitimate to criticise someone for obnoxious use of language, right? That there's a difference between doing that and demanding someone be thrown out of public life?

    Who is calling for cancellation? Name these warriors at which you're 'giggling'. I'm perhaps a bit sleepy, so I may have missed those calling for Rayner to no longer be an MP.
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,895
    LostPassword said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    DPM is a non-job. It's the archetypal non-job.
    Unless Rayner gets to become it. At which point it would be the End Of Britain.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,615
    edited April 25
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    squareroot2 said:

    Note that Scott xp is trying to deflect her unpleasantness by saying Dorries said it first. So what....

    The point is that Conservative MPs will have recognised the quotation. It is Labour strategy to undermine the Prime Minister among the backbenchers who have the power to oust him.
    Yes, and at its core Rayners comment is essentially the same as @isams, that the Tory backbenchers replaced a big winner by a loser. Not once but twice, and maybe thus summer thrice.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,616
    LostPassword said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    DPM is a non-job. It's the archetypal non-job.
    Bit harsh on Clement Attlee.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    I posted the real Raynergate scandal on the last thread when everyone was asleep last night.

    If there is any truth in Private Eye's allusion the whole Raynergate charade is disgusting.

    Now here's something for the pint-sized snowflakes to mull over.

    https://twitter.com/PrivateEyeNews/status/1783172206886826049?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
  • StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 17,207
    LostPassword said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    DPM is a non-job. It's the archetypal non-job.
    Which is why the pearl-clutching about Rayner (not my cup of tea, but not my choice to make and I can see the point in the abstract) is silly.

    But even given that DPM is a non-job... Why Oliver Dowden?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652
    JosiasJessop said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Foxy said:

    It's time #PMQs was abolished. It has degenerated into a series of scripted one liners from teenage SPADS and planted questions. Gulis opening "question" was risible. No PM answers the questions. The speaker never tries to compel them to do so. We need a better form of accountability, such as an expanded role for the Liason Committee.

    Rayners comment was below the belt, but hit home. The "pint-sized" descriptor was less damaging than "loser", which the voters and MPs know to be true. Sunak is at his worst when he loses his temper, he won't respond well to it.

    Nah. If you go on Twatter, it's the 'pint-sized' part that people seem to concentrate on.

    Twitter is not the real world.
    No, but then what other evidence is there that the assertion @Foxy made is correct?

    He has expressed an opinion. My guess is that more people do see Sunak as a loser rather than as someone who is not very tall. But maybe it is his height that voters have an issue with.

  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,189
    ydoethur said:

    TimS said:

    EPG said:

    Most U.S. presidential polling is giving 8-14% to Kennedy. To me, this creates huge uncertainty about the eventual outcome.

    Key is to look backwards I think. When Kennedy’s rise happened, who fell in lockstep? (I don’t know, I’ve not looked).

    Similar to how I look backwards to the Rise of Reform and see them taking around 5-6% from Con and 1-2% from Lib Dem. That’s where I think the votes will go back if they decline.
    Two guesses:

    1) Most people saying they will vote RFK are currently disaffected Dems trading on his name recognition without awareness of how big a numpty he is;

    2) As time goes on, he will lose some of those but maintain his share by picking up votes from Trump - people who hate Biden and have (ahem) interesting views but can't bring themselves to vote for a traitor, failure and criminal.
    FPT

    If you look at the latest polling where pollsters have done Biden-Trump H2H polling at the same time as 5-way polling including Kennedy, Stein and West, it looks like the Kennedy numbers are coming slightly more from Trump than Biden. Though the picture is mixed, and I've made a few assumptions.

    It's probably best just to look at the H2H polling to get a snapshot of how the race is going. Kennedy isn't going to get anything like 8-14% of the vote (probably), and Stein and West aren't going to get 2-3% each.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    BREAKING | The SNP is set to break off the Bute House Agreement ending the power-sharing agreement with the Scottish Greens, STV News understands.

    https://x.com/STVNews/status/1783388814410387572
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,361
    SouthamObserver said:

    Taz said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @ringwodian

    A lot of Tories seem to be getting upset about Angela Rayner quoting Nadine Dorries today.

    It's woman of the people, Ange. She can say what she wants. Be as rude as she wants. It doesn't matter. She's authentic and down wiv da working class. She is the beating heart of the red wall.

    According to middle class, white, centrist dad commentators and hacks on twitter.

    Just as Boris Johnson could get away with racism, lies and grift because "Boris is Boris". There are politicians who get a free pass. Until they don't. That may well happen to Rayner at some point. But right now, she is riding high. The Torty client press has misjudged the homes story and she clearly knows that.


    I think the homes thing is a non story. I do think she has managed it badly and come over as shifty and evasive on it. That probably gave it legs. At worse I suspect she is a victim of a complex and convoluted tax regime, at best she has done nothing wrong.

    Yes, and those who were most visceral about Johnson on here are the ones lapping up anything Rayner says or does. My side right or wrong is one of the worst traits you can get in politics. Neither should be acceptable.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,615
    JosiasJessop said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Foxy said:

    It's time #PMQs was abolished. It has degenerated into a series of scripted one liners from teenage SPADS and planted questions. Gulis opening "question" was risible. No PM answers the questions. The speaker never tries to compel them to do so. We need a better form of accountability, such as an expanded role for the Liason Committee.

    Rayners comment was below the belt, but hit home. The "pint-sized" descriptor was less damaging than "loser", which the voters and MPs know to be true. Sunak is at his worst when he loses his temper, he won't respond well to it.

    Nah. If you go on Twatter, it's the 'pint-sized' part that people seem to concentrate on.

    Twitter is not the real world.
    No, but then what other evidence is there that the assertion @Foxy made is correct?
    There is plenty of polling out there that shows that the voters, even Con 2019 ones, think Sunak a "loser". Even the most obtuse Tory backbenchers must have noticed.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,652
    JosiasJessop said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    He sounded fine on the radio to me. Unlike Rayner, who stumbled over words on a few occasions.

    Yep, I don't think Rayner was all that brilliant in the Commons yesterday. She is not a fluent speaker. That said, I thought Dowden was pretty poor too. His voice is too high-pitched for Parliamentary cut and thrust.

  • TazTaz Posts: 14,361
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. Pioneers, 'cancel warriors'?

    You understand it's legitimate to criticise someone for obnoxious use of language, right? That there's a difference between doing that and demanding someone be thrown out of public life?

    Who is calling for cancellation? Name these warriors at which you're 'giggling'. I'm perhaps a bit sleepy, so I may have missed those calling for Rayner to no longer be an MP.

    He's a Lib Dem parliamentary candidate. You have to expect such non evidence based extrapolations.

    It will be "winning here" barcharts next.
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    CarlottaVance said:

    BREAKING | The SNP is set to break off the Bute House Agreement ending the power-sharing agreement with the Scottish Greens, STV News understands.

    https://x.com/STVNews/status/1783388814410387572

    Does turkeys, voting and Christmas spring to mind?
  • RochdalePioneersRochdalePioneers Posts: 28,895
    SouthamObserver said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    He sounded fine on the radio to me. Unlike Rayner, who stumbled over words on a few occasions.

    Yep, I don't think Rayner was all that brilliant in the Commons yesterday. She is not a fluent speaker. That said, I thought Dowden was pretty poor too. His voice is too high-pitched for Parliamentary cut and thrust.

    I'm not a massive Rayner fan. And she's been somewhat flip-floppy with her positioning between the moderates and the Corbynite loons. But she clearly does have cut through with an enormous number of voters in a way that Starmer doesn't. And no Tory other than Boris can manage it either.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,043
    squareroot2 said:

    Note that Scott xp is trying to deflect her unpleasantness by saying Dorries said it first. So what....

    Agreed.

    The sooner the party which had her on their front bench is gone from government, and we can forget about her, the better.
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,237
    squareroot2 said:

    Yes. Short people are very sensitive about their height.

    I recall the debate used to be whether God made short people aggressive to make up for their lack of height or, seeing how aggressive they were, made them short to limit the damage
  • StillWatersStillWaters Posts: 8,237
    Scott_xP said:

    @ringwodian

    A lot of Tories seem to be getting upset about Angela Rayner quoting Nadine Dorries today.

    It wasn’t framed as a quote.

    And there’s a difference between the House of Commons/ active politician and a washed-up hack with a book to sell
  • MexicanpeteMexicanpete Posts: 28,368
    SouthamObserver said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    He sounded fine on the radio to me. Unlike Rayner, who stumbled over words on a few occasions.

    Yep, I don't think Rayner was all that brilliant in the Commons yesterday. She is not a fluent speaker. That said, I thought Dowden was pretty poor too. His voice is too high-pitched for Parliamentary cut and thrust.

    Dowden's problem was he arrived with an agenda laden speech focusing on Raynergate, so when Rayner pulled that rug from under him in the first sentence he was floundering to the end. He didn't have the wit to ad lib. After her first sentence was finished she might as well have sat down, he'd already lost.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,950
    I think more worrying than Ange being nathty to little Rishi is that the owner and the editor of the Scum (I believe that’s a PB approved epithet?) want rid, and may have their way.


  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Mexicanpete said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    BREAKING | The SNP is set to break off the Bute House Agreement ending the power-sharing agreement with the Scottish Greens, STV News understands.

    https://x.com/STVNews/status/1783388814410387572

    Does turkeys, voting and Christmas spring to mind?
    They'll carry on as a minority government I suppose - though why the Greens were in government in the first place is a mystery for the ages - so Sturgeon could say she had "a majority" I suspect - but many of their muck ups (GRR, Deposit Return Scheme) have Green fingerprints all over them....
  • Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 35,978
    StillWaters said:

    Scott_xP said:

    @ringwodian

    A lot of Tories seem to be getting upset about Angela Rayner quoting Nadine Dorries today.

    It wasn’t framed as a quote.
    The people it was aimed at know it was a quote.

    And the people who didn't know are clutching their pearls, until they find out it was a quote
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,189
    SouthamObserver said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    JosiasJessop said:

    Foxy said:

    It's time #PMQs was abolished. It has degenerated into a series of scripted one liners from teenage SPADS and planted questions. Gulis opening "question" was risible. No PM answers the questions. The speaker never tries to compel them to do so. We need a better form of accountability, such as an expanded role for the Liason Committee.

    Rayners comment was below the belt, but hit home. The "pint-sized" descriptor was less damaging than "loser", which the voters and MPs know to be true. Sunak is at his worst when he loses his temper, he won't respond well to it.

    Nah. If you go on Twatter, it's the 'pint-sized' part that people seem to concentrate on.

    Twitter is not the real world.
    No, but then what other evidence is there that the assertion @Foxy made is correct?

    He has expressed an opinion. My guess is that more people do see Sunak as a loser rather than as someone who is not very tall. But maybe it is his height that voters have an issue with.

    Insulting someone because of a physical characteristic that they couldn't change even if they wanted to is the move of an arsehole.

    There is some evidence that voters have a preference for taller politicians, but surely this works best as an unconscious or semi-conscious bias? Crudely pointing it out also seems bad politics
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,231
    Labour is going to preside over some serious unemployment


    “The head of Indian IT company Tata Consultancy Services has said artificial intelligence will result in “minimal” need for call centres in as soon as a year, with AI’s rapid advances set to upend a vast industry across Asia and beyond.”

    FT ££

    How many people work in call centres in the UK? I imagine it is not a trivia number

    Few will mourn these repetitive jobs (tho the people who get made redundant might); AI will not stop there

    Why do none of our politicians talk about this? This isn’t some distant prospect, this is happening shortly - “in as soon as a year”

    A challenge for Reeves and Starmer
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Seems the Bute House Agreement is toast. I think the influence of SNP Westminster leader Stephen Flynn was a key factor here.

    https://x.com/paulhutcheon/status/1783394060452958710
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,858
    Stuartinromford said:

    LostPassword said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    DPM is a non-job. It's the archetypal non-job.
    Which is why the pearl-clutching about Rayner (not my cup of tea, but not my choice to make and I can see the point in the abstract) is silly.

    But even given that DPM is a non-job... Why Oliver Dowden?
    It is just part and parcel of the prejudice against the privately educated that TSE lamented earlier in this thread. Oliver Dowden went to a comprehensive school.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,651
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    LostPassword said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    DPM is a non-job. It's the archetypal non-job.
    Bit harsh on Clement Attlee.
    I doubt many would remember Clement Attlee had he only ever been DPM.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,352
    TheScreamingEagles said:

    LostPassword said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    DPM is a non-job. It's the archetypal non-job.
    Bit harsh on Clement Attlee.
    Ha!

    The joke only works because DPM is such a non-job people forget that he had it.
  • DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 27,858
    Leon said:

    Labour is going to preside over some serious unemployment


    “The head of Indian IT company Tata Consultancy Services has said artificial intelligence will result in “minimal” need for call centres in as soon as a year, with AI’s rapid advances set to upend a vast industry across Asia and beyond.”

    FT ££

    How many people work in call centres in the UK? I imagine it is not a trivia number

    Few will mourn these repetitive jobs (tho the people who get made redundant might); AI will not stop there

    Why do none of our politicians talk about this? This isn’t some distant prospect, this is happening shortly - “in as soon as a year”

    A challenge for Reeves and Starmer

    Oh do keep up. AI chatbots will get better. Most call centre jobs were offshored years ago. They've already been lost.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 60,402
    Leon said:

    Labour is going to preside over some serious unemployment


    “The head of Indian IT company Tata Consultancy Services has said artificial intelligence will result in “minimal” need for call centres in as soon as a year, with AI’s rapid advances set to upend a vast industry across Asia and beyond.”

    FT ££

    How many people work in call centres in the UK? I imagine it is not a trivia number

    Few will mourn these repetitive jobs (tho the people who get made redundant might); AI will not stop there

    Why do none of our politicians talk about this? This isn’t some distant prospect, this is happening shortly - “in as soon as a year”

    A challenge for Reeves and Starmer

    People hate talking to a computer.

    Often you want empathy and understanding and not a chatbot.

    Everyone's situation is different.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,772
    Leon said:

    Labour is going to preside over some serious unemployment


    “The head of Indian IT company Tata Consultancy Services has said artificial intelligence will result in “minimal” need for call centres in as soon as a year, with AI’s rapid advances set to upend a vast industry across Asia and beyond.”

    FT ££

    How many people work in call centres in the UK? I imagine it is not a trivia number

    Few will mourn these repetitive jobs (tho the people who get made redundant might); AI will not stop there

    Why do none of our politicians talk about this? This isn’t some distant prospect, this is happening shortly - “in as soon as a year”

    A challenge for Reeves and Starmer

    This also strikes me as bad news for anyone attempting to make any progress whatsoever with their query.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    Leon said:



    How many people work in call centres in the UK? I imagine it is not a trivia number

    There over 6000 call centres in the United Kingdom
    There are around 812,000 agent roles within these centres
    Over 4% of the UK’s working population is employed at a call centre


    https://www.cactussearch.co.uk/about-us/clients/white-papers/current-challenges-customer-contact-recruitment-2021/
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,216
    SNP leadership hopeful Humza Yousaf has said his party cannot afford to risk a minority government amid concerns over the future of the powersharing agreement with the Scottish Greens.

    The Health Secretary – who will find out on Monday if he has beaten Kate Forbes and Ash Regan to replace Nicola Sturgeon as party leader and first minister – said any move away from the Bute House agreement would “destabilise” the Scottish Government.

    It comes as the Greens sent a strong signal that they may not work with Ms Forbes if she is elected as Scotland’s next leader.

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/humza-yousaf-snp-greens-health-secretary-scottish-b2307955.html
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,615
    Theuniondivvie said:

    I think more worrying than Ange being nathty to little Rishi is that the owner and the editor of the Scum (I believe that’s a PB approved epithet?) want rid, and may have their way.


    Rayner is useful to Labour. She is a standout in a sea of grey men with greyer politics.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,307
    I rather like red hair.

    There. That's politics for today sorted.

    Off to London shortly as am going to Sandown for the racing on Saturday and to Ham House on Sunday for a concert and many other delights.

    Sadly I will miss Van Den Bogerd's testimony at the PO Inquiry today. Vennells' hatchet-faced enforcer and a witness described by Mr Justice Fraser thus -

    'in future he would accept what she said ONLY if it was ‘clearly and incontrovertibly corroborated by contemporaneous documents’.

    This is the judicial equivalent of "Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire".

    Interesting tidbit in the evidence of Chris Aujard yesterday: when the PO decided to wind up the mediation scheme they needed to get the Minister's approval. It's the first reference I've seen to a Minister getting involved in a PO decision and rather gives the lie to the "arms length" claim. I wonder if this will be picked up later when the relevant Minister gives evidence.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,722
    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    LostPassword said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    DPM is a non-job. It's the archetypal non-job.
    Bit harsh on Clement Attlee.
    I doubt many would remember Clement Attlee had he only ever been DPM.
    People only remember Prescott because he punched someone shagged someone and had two jags. Not a remarkable epitaph.
  • Alphabet_SoupAlphabet_Soup Posts: 3,242
    Stuartinromford said:

    LostPassword said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    DPM is a non-job. It's the archetypal non-job.
    Which is why the pearl-clutching about Rayner (not my cup of tea, but not my choice to make and I can see the point in the abstract) is silly.

    But even given that DPM is a non-job... Why Oliver Dowden?
    Window dressing. He's tall, white and thick - the opposite of Sunak in every respect.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,231
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Leon said:

    Labour is going to preside over some serious unemployment


    “The head of Indian IT company Tata Consultancy Services has said artificial intelligence will result in “minimal” need for call centres in as soon as a year, with AI’s rapid advances set to upend a vast industry across Asia and beyond.”

    FT ££

    How many people work in call centres in the UK? I imagine it is not a trivia number

    Few will mourn these repetitive jobs (tho the people who get made redundant might); AI will not stop there

    Why do none of our politicians talk about this? This isn’t some distant prospect, this is happening shortly - “in as soon as a year”

    A challenge for Reeves and Starmer

    Oh do keep up. AI chatbots will get better. Most call centre jobs were offshored years ago. They've already been lost.
    The article is about India, it speculates that millions will soon lose their jobs in India - and the Philippines, this is a real thing and it’s going to be highly painful

    However this is also a UK issue, for Labour

    1. How many call centre jobs have been re-shored to the UK? A lot, I imagine. I often hear nice British regional accents when I finally get through

    2. It really really isn’t going to stop with “call centre jobs”, they are the low-hanging fruit; it will move on to nicer jobs. This is why I hear ministers waffling on about Britain’s great creative sector and how to boost it. The question should be, what bits will be left after AI has laid waste the landscape?

    is anyone in the coming Labour government even thinking about this, let alone talking about it?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,797
    DecrepiterJohnL said:

    Leon said:

    Labour is going to preside over some serious unemployment


    “The head of Indian IT company Tata Consultancy Services has said artificial intelligence will result in “minimal” need for call centres in as soon as a year, with AI’s rapid advances set to upend a vast industry across Asia and beyond.”

    FT ££

    How many people work in call centres in the UK? I imagine it is not a trivia number

    Few will mourn these repetitive jobs (tho the people who get made redundant might); AI will not stop there

    Why do none of our politicians talk about this? This isn’t some distant prospect, this is happening shortly - “in as soon as a year”

    A challenge for Reeves and Starmer

    Oh do keep up. AI chatbots will get better. Most call centre jobs were offshored years ago. They've already been lost.
    I would say, and this is only anecdotal , that the trend in recent years has been for call centres to be onshored again as businesses found that off shore centres were costing them business with quality and control issues. The only examples I can recall in recent times are some of the larger international hotel groups. Tesco's for example, are now a large employer here in Dundee where their call centre is based.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,231
    CarlottaVance said:

    Leon said:



    How many people work in call centres in the UK? I imagine it is not a trivia number

    There over 6000 call centres in the United Kingdom
    There are around 812,000 agent roles within these centres
    Over 4% of the UK’s working population is employed at a call centre


    https://www.cactussearch.co.uk/about-us/clients/white-papers/current-challenges-customer-contact-recruitment-2021/
    So that’s fine then. Just a million unemployed. No biggie

    But it’s all fine they can retrain as plumbers and hookers
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,651
    CarlottaVance said:

    Leon said:



    How many people work in call centres in the UK? I imagine it is not a trivia number

    There over 6000 call centres in the United Kingdom
    There are around 812,000 agent roles within these centres
    Over 4% of the UK’s working population is employed at a call centre


    https://www.cactussearch.co.uk/about-us/clients/white-papers/current-challenges-customer-contact-recruitment-2021/
    And a lot of those call centres are a complete waste of time and energy - all those involved in oiling the wheels of the retail energy 'market' for a start. (Although I assume since the failure of said market the number of call centre roles there has significantly reduced.)
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 41,950
    squareroot2 said:

    Benpointer said:

    TheScreamingEagles said:

    LostPassword said:

    RochdalePioneers said:

    The more I read some of the comments on here, the more I giggle. That lank stream of yawn is Deputy Prime Minister. He was barely able to even read the scripted answers in a strangled high-pitched voice which showed how nervous he was. Never mind what someone who is DPM needs to be able to do - react.

    Did he - at any point - show the slightest ability to actually listen to what was being said, think *I'll thrown this back at her* and then do so? Rayner seems to be upsetting some cancel warriors because she might become DPM.

    Dowden *is* DPM. Shouldn't you be more worried about that?

    DPM is a non-job. It's the archetypal non-job.
    Bit harsh on Clement Attlee.
    I doubt many would remember Clement Attlee had he only ever been DPM.
    People only remember Prescott because he punched someone shagged someone and had two jags. Not a remarkable epitaph.
    I’d take that.
    Depending on the punchee, shagee and which Jags.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,043
    edited April 25
    Theuniondivvie said:

    I think more worrying than Ange being nathty to little Rishi is that the owner and the editor of the Scum (I believe that’s a PB approved epithet?) want rid, and may have their way.


    I noted that R4 interview earlier this week.
    Freud was quite correct, and the interview is well worth a listen on BBC Sounds.

    I don't particularly like Rayner, but I like the confected campaign to get rid of her even less.

    Rayner herself, though, is of considerably less importance than is Starmer keeping his distance from the press, so that government policy isn't just directed at winning the daily headlines (a besetting sin of Blair's administration).
This discussion has been closed.