Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Never go full Corbyn 2019 – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,917
edited June 8 in General
Never go full Corbyn 2019 – politicalbetting.com

Britons would be more upset by a 2024 Sunak victory than they would have been by a 2019 Corbyn triumphIf Sunak win a majority: 59% would be upset[Asked in 2019] If Corbyn wins a majority: 52% would have been upsethttps://t.co/QCNNUvBB9f pic.twitter.com/ByXRtDZ1DP

Read the full story here

«13456789

Comments

  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,437
    edited May 26
    First Like Jezza in Islington North
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048
    2nd like Leeds (hopefully)
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,437
    How boring is Monaco

    1 lap remains

    Top 10 still in grid order

    Yawn
  • Options
    dixiedeandixiedean Posts: 28,965
    edited May 26
    Fourth like the Tories hopefully.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,437
    dixiedean said:

    Fourth like the Tories hopefully.

    Tories set for first and second Comrade
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048

    How boring is Monaco

    1 lap remains

    Top 10 still in grid order

    Yawn

    I love the whole thing around the Monaco GP, I would love to attend one day but you're right about the lack of incident. The Formula 1 cars need to get smaller again somehow and allow some overtaking.
  • Options
    How would Britons react to a Sunak / Starmer election victory?

    If Sunak won a majority
    Happy: 15%
    Unhappy: 59%
    Wouldn't mind: 15%

    If Starmer won a majority
    Happy: 34%
    Unhappy: 35%
    Wouldn't mind: 17%

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1794643556596064291

    I am struggling to see how this isn't enthusiasm for SKS, can somebody explain where I am going wrong with my analysis?

    51% of people either would be happy or wouldn't mind, that's hardly "he's just as bad as Sunak" is it?
  • Options
    williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 49,774
    dixiedean said:

    Fourth like the Tories hopefully.

    "Go forth..."
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,437

    dixiedean said:

    Fourth like the Tories hopefully.

    Tories set for first and second Comrade

    dixiedean said:

    Fourth like the Tories hopefully.

    Tories set for first and second Comrade
    And 3rd for that matter
  • Options
    geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,407

    dixiedean said:

    Fourth like the Tories hopefully.

    "Go forth..."
    and multiply

  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 58,106
    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048
    So if 59% would be upset if Sunak won, then 41% by definition wouldn't be unhappy. Parties have won a good majority on less than that.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 117,033
    edited May 26

    How would Britons react to a Sunak / Starmer election victory?

    If Sunak won a majority
    Happy: 15%
    Unhappy: 59%
    Wouldn't mind: 15%

    If Starmer won a majority
    Happy: 34%
    Unhappy: 35%
    Wouldn't mind: 17%

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1794643556596064291

    I am struggling to see how this isn't enthusiasm for SKS, can somebody explain where I am going wrong with my analysis?

    51% of people either would be happy or wouldn't mind, that's hardly "he's just as bad as Sunak" is it?

    Rookie mistake to stick the wouldn't mind with the happy group.

    How about 66% of voters aren't happy if Starmer won a majority.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 79,291
    edited May 26
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 34,982

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    There is a mistake in the headline

    The most dangerous PM since the 1970s was BoZo himself
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 117,033
    Dirty Leeds, don't want them stinking out the Premier League.
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    He's not wrong, SKS will clearly be more left-wing than Blair and Brown's premiership was only a very slight touch more left-wing. I would order the Prime Ministers since the 1970s as Brown-Blair-Johnson-Cameron-Major-May-Thatcher-Sunak-Truss

  • Options

    How would Britons react to a Sunak / Starmer election victory?

    If Sunak won a majority
    Happy: 15%
    Unhappy: 59%
    Wouldn't mind: 15%

    If Starmer won a majority
    Happy: 34%
    Unhappy: 35%
    Wouldn't mind: 17%

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1794643556596064291

    I am struggling to see how this isn't enthusiasm for SKS, can somebody explain where I am going wrong with my analysis?

    51% of people either would be happy or wouldn't mind, that's hardly "he's just as bad as Sunak" is it?

    Rookie mistake to stick the wouldn't mind with the happy group.

    How 66% of voters aren't happy if Starmer won a majority.
    Eh?

    Are you saying people saying they wouldn't mind a SKS majority is as bad the commentary which is that everyone thinks he's as bad as Rishi Sunak? These numbers to be confirm that there's not a huge amount of enthusiasm for Starmer - but there's more than reported and he's more popular than Sunak by a country mile.
  • Options
    pigeonpigeon Posts: 4,767
    Labour will inevitably become very unpopular mid-term. The electorate has been through fifteen years of repeated disasters, economic decline, the decay of public services, stagnant wages and rising taxes that have left most people below pensionable age feeling substantially worse off. All the incoming Government has to offer in response is continuity Sunak with minor cosmetic alterations, and trotting out Reeves at regular intervals to remind fed up voters that this is really on the other lot and to plead for time, and an economic boom that absolutely nobody believes is coming, to rescue the situation.

    Prediction: the public is totally out of patience with politicians and doesn't want to hear any more hollow promises of the jam tomorrow variety. To govern is to choose, and sooner rather than later the next Government will have to choose either yet more austerity or a major raid on wealth. The latter might cost them the 2029 election; the former certainly will.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 15,677

    How would Britons react to a Sunak / Starmer election victory?

    If Sunak won a majority
    Happy: 15%
    Unhappy: 59%
    Wouldn't mind: 15%

    If Starmer won a majority
    Happy: 34%
    Unhappy: 35%
    Wouldn't mind: 17%

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1794643556596064291

    I am struggling to see how this isn't enthusiasm for SKS, can somebody explain where I am going wrong with my analysis?

    51% of people either would be happy or wouldn't mind, that's hardly "he's just as bad as Sunak" is it?

    Rookie mistake to stick the wouldn't mind with the happy group.

    How 66% of voters aren't happy if Starmer won a majority.
    What it says is that Starmer is probably broadly acceptable under the circumstances. Those circumstances being the current government.

    Question is what happens after that. Very little buffer if things go wrong but also room to surprise on the upside.

    Either way, he gets five years.
  • Options

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    Other opinions are available.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,770
    DM_Andy said:

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    He's not wrong, SKS will clearly be more left-wing than Blair and Brown's premiership was only a very slight touch more left-wing. I would order the Prime Ministers since the 1970s as Brown-Blair-Johnson-Cameron-Major-May-Thatcher-Sunak-Truss

    Serious question for clarity. Is that list in terms of how left wing they were or your personal preference good/bad?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 117,033
    edited May 26

    How would Britons react to a Sunak / Starmer election victory?

    If Sunak won a majority
    Happy: 15%
    Unhappy: 59%
    Wouldn't mind: 15%

    If Starmer won a majority
    Happy: 34%
    Unhappy: 35%
    Wouldn't mind: 17%

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1794643556596064291

    I am struggling to see how this isn't enthusiasm for SKS, can somebody explain where I am going wrong with my analysis?

    51% of people either would be happy or wouldn't mind, that's hardly "he's just as bad as Sunak" is it?

    Rookie mistake to stick the wouldn't mind with the happy group.

    How 66% of voters aren't happy if Starmer won a majority.
    What it says is that Starmer is probably broadly acceptable under the circumstances. Those circumstances being the current government.

    Question is what happens after that. Very little buffer if things go wrong but also room to surprise on the upside.

    Either way, he gets five years.
    Yup.

    The least worst option.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 58,106

    How would Britons react to a Sunak / Starmer election victory?

    If Sunak won a majority
    Happy: 15%
    Unhappy: 59%
    Wouldn't mind: 15%

    If Starmer won a majority
    Happy: 34%
    Unhappy: 35%
    Wouldn't mind: 17%

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1794643556596064291

    I am struggling to see how this isn't enthusiasm for SKS, can somebody explain where I am going wrong with my analysis?

    51% of people either would be happy or wouldn't mind, that's hardly "he's just as bad as Sunak" is it?

    They are atrocious figures for Sunak and there's no silver lining.

    I might just add its mixing together leader and party brands though.

    Starmer's underlying numbers for an opposition leader seeking to gain power aren't brilliant and unhappy exceeds happy even now.
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    By the way, you realise that the article is paywalled? so we can't read it.
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048

    DM_Andy said:

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    He's not wrong, SKS will clearly be more left-wing than Blair and Brown's premiership was only a very slight touch more left-wing. I would order the Prime Ministers since the 1970s as Brown-Blair-Johnson-Cameron-Major-May-Thatcher-Sunak-Truss

    Serious question for clarity. Is that list in terms of how left wing they were or your personal preference good/bad?
    left to right
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 58,106
    DM_Andy said:

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    He's not wrong, SKS will clearly be more left-wing than Blair and Brown's premiership was only a very slight touch more left-wing. I would order the Prime Ministers since the 1970s as Brown-Blair-Johnson-Cameron-Major-May-Thatcher-Sunak-Truss

    Yes, he will certainly be more left-wing than Blair and Brown.

    That's apparent in his policy platform even now.
  • Options
    I'm not sure SKS really is very left wing at all, I think placing him politically is something people have struggled to do since he was elected.

    I think he's actually very New Labour, if New Labour was formed in 2020.
  • Options
    nico679nico679 Posts: 5,671

    How would Britons react to a Sunak / Starmer election victory?

    If Sunak won a majority
    Happy: 15%
    Unhappy: 59%
    Wouldn't mind: 15%

    If Starmer won a majority
    Happy: 34%
    Unhappy: 35%
    Wouldn't mind: 17%

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1794643556596064291

    I am struggling to see how this isn't enthusiasm for SKS, can somebody explain where I am going wrong with my analysis?

    51% of people either would be happy or wouldn't mind, that's hardly "he's just as bad as Sunak" is it?

    You’d think those currently planning to vote for them would be happy . So Sunak should be polling higher and so should Starmer.

    It of course looks bleak for Sunak but although it’s not been mentioned recently if the police charge Rayner that could cause the current Labour campaign to go off the rails at least for a time.

    The Manchester police really need to make a decision quickly.
  • Options
    https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/inside-starmers-plan-to-use-private-finance-to-boost-britains-infrastructure-3075081

    Inside Starmer’s plan to use private finance to boost Britain’s infrastructure
  • Options
    another_richardanother_richard Posts: 25,821
    Some comparative data on Labour's plan to save the English education system by recruiting 6,500 more teachers:

    There are 468,400 FTE teachers, which is an increase of 2,800 since last year and an increase of 27,000 since 2010 when the school workforce census began.

    https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/school-workforce-in-england

    Doesn't that suggest that Labour's plan might lead to a lower rate of teacher recruitment than what we currently have in 'everything is broken' Britain ?

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

    https://youtu.be/UDfAdHBtK_Q?t=469
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048

    I'm not sure SKS really is very left wing at all, I think placing him politically is something people have struggled to do since he was elected.

    I think he's actually very New Labour, if New Labour was formed in 2020.

    I wouldn't disagree, but I can't imagine a Blair or Brown government creating a Great British Energy for example. The dividing line is narrow, SKS is very much in the New Labour tradition (for good and ill) but in my opinion he's very slightly left of the other two.
  • Options
    bigglesbiggles Posts: 5,562
    edited May 26

    How would Britons react to a Sunak / Starmer election victory?

    If Sunak won a majority
    Happy: 15%
    Unhappy: 59%
    Wouldn't mind: 15%

    If Starmer won a majority
    Happy: 34%
    Unhappy: 35%
    Wouldn't mind: 17%

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1794643556596064291

    I am struggling to see how this isn't enthusiasm for SKS, can somebody explain where I am going wrong with my analysis?

    51% of people either would be happy or wouldn't mind, that's hardly "he's just as bad as Sunak" is it?

    It’s a weird question. I wouldn’t mind if Starmer was PM. But I also didn’t mind Johnson, May, Cameron, Brown, Blair etc.

    I did mind Truss and I would have minded Corbyn.

    Most people, most of the time don’t much mind. It’s only the truly politically engaged who are horrified. By that same token, over half being unhappy if Sunak won is… suboptimal for him.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 79,291
    edited May 26

    Some comparative data on Labour's plan to save the English education system by recruiting 6,500 more teachers:

    There are 468,400 FTE teachers, which is an increase of 2,800 since last year and an increase of 27,000 since 2010 when the school workforce census began.

    https://explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk/find-statistics/school-workforce-in-england

    Doesn't that suggest that Labour's plan might lead to a lower rate of teacher recruitment than what we currently have in 'everything is broken' Britain ?

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

    https://youtu.be/UDfAdHBtK_Q?t=469

    I think I read somewhere that ~40k teachers leave the profession every year through retirement, change of career, illness. So the policy is to hire basically to hire ~41.5k teachers every year rather than ~40k teachers for 5 years. Its a rounding error and less than last years increase.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 79,291
    Dirty Leeds hit bar...nevermind.
  • Options
    AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,367
    edited May 26
    DM_Andy said:

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    He's not wrong, SKS will clearly be more left-wing than Blair and Brown's premiership was only a very slight touch more left-wing. I would order the Prime Ministers since the 1970s as Brown-Blair-Johnson-Cameron-Major-May-Thatcher-Sunak-Truss

    Economically, I think you're right - but in terms of social liberalism, I would start the list with Blair-Johnson-Cameron-Brown... perhaps even May ahead of Brown, too. Remember 'Gulags for Slags' and the like - though I wouldn't be surprised in Sunak were to come up with something similar in the weeks ahead!
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 15,677

    How would Britons react to a Sunak / Starmer election victory?

    If Sunak won a majority
    Happy: 15%
    Unhappy: 59%
    Wouldn't mind: 15%

    If Starmer won a majority
    Happy: 34%
    Unhappy: 35%
    Wouldn't mind: 17%

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1794643556596064291

    I am struggling to see how this isn't enthusiasm for SKS, can somebody explain where I am going wrong with my analysis?

    51% of people either would be happy or wouldn't mind, that's hardly "he's just as bad as Sunak" is it?

    Rookie mistake to stick the wouldn't mind with the happy group.

    How 66% of voters aren't happy if Starmer won a majority.
    What it says is that Starmer is probably broadly acceptable under the circumstances. Those circumstances being the current government.

    Question is what happens after that. Very little buffer if things go wrong but also room to surprise on the upside.

    Either way, he gets five years.
    Yup.

    The least worst option.
    I do wonder if the meltdown in the Conservatives is because of that realisation.

    I mean, losing to Blair was terrible. But he was also a genius at retail politics and he sort of accepted a lot of the Thatcherite consensus. So it wasn't too bad.

    But losing to Starmer- the man's a ghastly lefty. And clearly not a great political player (though he's an impressively fast learner). For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048
    9 minutes time added on and they've spent the 1st one patching up KWP and Dan James
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,437
    Re Corbyn

    The problem with Corbyn is that he's never been on the right side of history; except when he opposed the Iraq War, Apartheid in South Africa, Poll Tax, supported miners strike, protested austerity, voted against tuition fees, stood up for Kurds/Palestinians, warned PFI would be an expensive disaster, warned against privatisation of water and rail would be a disaster.

    Always wrong. Prsumably the good people of Islington North will realise the Private Health CEO is the way to go
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 34,982

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 117,033
    edited May 26

    Re Corbyn

    The problem with Corbyn is that he's never been on the right side of history; except when he opposed the Iraq War, Apartheid in South Africa, Poll Tax, supported miners strike, protested austerity, voted against tuition fees, stood up for Kurds/Palestinians, warned PFI would be an expensive disaster, warned against privatisation of water and rail would be a disaster.

    Always wrong. Prsumably the good people of Islington North will realise the Private Health CEO is the way to go

    He also stood up for the IRA and other enemies of the UK.
  • Options

    Re Corbyn

    The problem with Corbyn is that he's never been on the right side of history; except when he opposed the Iraq War, Apartheid in South Africa, Poll Tax, supported miners strike, protested austerity, voted against tuition fees, stood up for Kurds/Palestinians, warned PFI would be an expensive disaster, warned against privatisation of water and rail would be a disaster.

    Always wrong. Prsumably the good people of Islington North will realise the Private Health CEO is the way to go

    He refused to say Russia was involved in Salisbury. As a former supporter, his record is that of opposing everything and occasionally being right.

    To me, Robin Cook was far more principled on Iraq, as was, erh, Keir Starmer
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 94,460

    I'm not sure SKS really is very left wing at all, I think placing him politically is something people have struggled to do since he was elected.

    I think he's actually very New Labour, if New Labour was formed in 2020.

    It could be you are projecting how New Labour he is, because he comes across as a pragmatic centrist.

    I don't share this intense fear of him as dangerous that is trying to be whipped up, but he became an MP in 2015 and developed as a politician through one of the most intense periods in recent political history, and one of the most left wing stances the party has taken. Unless he really was lying the whole time, I'd assume he is probably more right wing than the New Labour days.

    It's similar to how some people think Sunak is a centrist, but given the period he came to prominence in I think that's pretty unlikely too.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 94,460

    https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/inside-starmers-plan-to-use-private-finance-to-boost-britains-infrastructure-3075081

    Inside Starmer’s plan to use private finance to boost Britain’s infrastructure


    According to industry sources, the party has drawn up plans to increase private-sector financing and streamline the planning system for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs).
    I'll believe the latter part when I see it - it should be a given that really big stuff should not be able to be held up so much, even if the trade off is allowing more hurdles for smaller scale stuff at local level.

    But private sector financing is a pretty broad description, haven't we had issues arising from that?
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,217

    Re Corbyn

    The problem with Corbyn is that he's never been on the right side of history; except when he opposed the Iraq War, Apartheid in South Africa, Poll Tax, supported miners strike, protested austerity, voted against tuition fees, stood up for Kurds/Palestinians, warned PFI would be an expensive disaster, warned against privatisation of water and rail would be a disaster.

    Always wrong. Prsumably the good people of Islington North will realise the Private Health CEO is the way to go

    The problem with Corbyn is that he gave us a Johnson premiership, from which stemmed the current mess. All else doesn’t matter. The last five years are to a large part down to his abject failure. That’s been a pretty big problem. Maybe if he’d managed to actually win a GE you’d have a point. He didn’t.
  • Options
    Scott_xP said:

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
    And it's been operating under a "benign" Tory government for the past 14 years and still gone down the pan. Some organisations just don't make it.
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048
    We Are Premier League, We Are Premier League. I feel like I've aged about ten years in the last ten minutes. I hope Rishi feels as relieved as I do.
  • Options
    londonpubmanlondonpubman Posts: 3,532
    Pity Rishi didn't go to the football. It would have given him something to be cheerful about!
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048

    Pity Rishi didn't go to the football. It would have given him something to be cheerful about!

    Andrew Bridgen's new best pal Matt Le Tissier was there.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 15,677
    DM_Andy said:

    We Are Premier League, We Are Premier League. I feel like I've aged about ten years in the last ten minutes. I hope Rishi feels as relieved as I do.

    And with Portsmouth moving up to the Championship, Hampshire Constabulary are probably also very relieved.

    Well done you, much as I resent saying it.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 24,617
    kle4 said:

    https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/inside-starmers-plan-to-use-private-finance-to-boost-britains-infrastructure-3075081

    Inside Starmer’s plan to use private finance to boost Britain’s infrastructure


    According to industry sources, the party has drawn up plans to increase private-sector financing and streamline the planning system for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs).
    I'll believe the latter part when I see it - it should be a given that really big stuff should not be able to be held up so much, even if the trade off is allowing more hurdles for smaller scale stuff at local level.

    But private sector financing is a pretty broad description, haven't we had issues arising from that?
    Clearly Labour havent been learning the lessons. Browns PFI gig was hardly a success.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 117,033
    Dirty Leeds lose the play-off final.

    Oh dear, how sad, never mind.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 34,982

    Pity Rishi didn't go to the football. It would have given him something to be cheerful about!

    I was expecting the helicopter to land on the pitch so he could emerge, John Terry stylee
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 34,982

    Dirty Leeds lose the play-off final.

    Oh dear, how sad, never mind.

    https://x.com/WilliamHill/status/1794761453704278280
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 94,460
    I still find the Corbyn years a little inexplicable. I get that people were looking for something different and Corbyn definitely offered that, and he had a kind of unassuming manner which I can see being appealing, but the level of fervour from his supporters was astonishing when he was just saying the same things he'd been saying since the 1980s (which was part of his pitch). It's not as though what he was offering was new, it had been offered before by others in the party.

    As I've said a part of me would like to see him win for the humour value, but if he loses it's a bit of a grubby end, kicked out of the party he was part of his whole life and without even much following within it as the MPs will be so grateful to Starmer for returning them to power.
  • Options
    SeaShantyIrish2SeaShantyIrish2 Posts: 16,690

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    "a must read" - for a sick parrot?
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048
    Scott_xP said:

    Pity Rishi didn't go to the football. It would have given him something to be cheerful about!

    I was expecting the helicopter to land on the pitch so he could emerge, John Terry stylee
    In full kit too, that would have been amazing.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 94,460

    kle4 said:

    https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/inside-starmers-plan-to-use-private-finance-to-boost-britains-infrastructure-3075081

    Inside Starmer’s plan to use private finance to boost Britain’s infrastructure


    According to industry sources, the party has drawn up plans to increase private-sector financing and streamline the planning system for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs).
    I'll believe the latter part when I see it - it should be a given that really big stuff should not be able to be held up so much, even if the trade off is allowing more hurdles for smaller scale stuff at local level.

    But private sector financing is a pretty broad description, haven't we had issues arising from that?
    Clearly Labour havent been learning the lessons. Browns PFI gig was hardly a success.
    Did it appear to be in the short term though? Because that's how a politician would tend to think on it.
  • Options
    kinabalukinabalu Posts: 40,223

    How would Britons react to a Sunak / Starmer election victory?

    If Sunak won a majority
    Happy: 15%
    Unhappy: 59%
    Wouldn't mind: 15%

    If Starmer won a majority
    Happy: 34%
    Unhappy: 35%
    Wouldn't mind: 17%

    https://x.com/YouGov/status/1794643556596064291

    I am struggling to see how this isn't enthusiasm for SKS, can somebody explain where I am going wrong with my analysis?

    51% of people either would be happy or wouldn't mind, that's hardly "he's just as bad as Sunak" is it?

    Rookie mistake to stick the wouldn't mind with the happy group.

    How 66% of voters aren't happy if Starmer won a majority.
    What it says is that Starmer is probably broadly acceptable under the circumstances. Those circumstances being the current government.

    Question is what happens after that. Very little buffer if things go wrong but also room to surprise on the upside.

    Either way, he gets five years.
    Yup.

    The least worst option.
    I do wonder if the meltdown in the Conservatives is because of that realisation.

    I mean, losing to Blair was terrible. But he was also a genius at retail politics and he sort of accepted a lot of the Thatcherite consensus. So it wasn't too bad.

    But losing to Starmer- the man's a ghastly lefty. And clearly not a great political player (though he's an impressively fast learner). For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.
    The Trussterfuck finished them off, I think. The Boris19 coalition went with the eponymous but they could have been competitive again in time for a GE24 if they hadn't tormented us all with that.
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048

    DM_Andy said:

    We Are Premier League, We Are Premier League. I feel like I've aged about ten years in the last ten minutes. I hope Rishi feels as relieved as I do.

    And with Portsmouth moving up to the Championship, Hampshire Constabulary are probably also very relieved.

    Well done you, much as I resent saying it.
    I don't mind most Pompey fans, it's really only the one with the bell that gets my goat. I understand he's not that popular even on his own side, that true?

  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 34,982
    kle4 said:

    I still find the Corbyn years a little inexplicable. I get that people were looking for something different and Corbyn definitely offered that, and he had a kind of unassuming manner which I can see being appealing, but the level of fervour from his supporters was astonishing when he was just saying the same things he'd been saying since the 1980s (which was part of his pitch). It's not as though what he was offering was new, it had been offered before by others in the party.

    As I've said a part of me would like to see him win for the humour value, but if he loses it's a bit of a grubby end, kicked out of the party he was part of his whole life and without even much following within it as the MPs will be so grateful to Starmer for returning them to power.

    Counterfactual. What if one of the other loony lefties had been picked to fight the leadership election that year and also won?

    Would they have been as inept, and terrorist adjacent as Jezza turned out to be?
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 24,617
    kle4 said:

    kle4 said:

    https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/inside-starmers-plan-to-use-private-finance-to-boost-britains-infrastructure-3075081

    Inside Starmer’s plan to use private finance to boost Britain’s infrastructure


    According to industry sources, the party has drawn up plans to increase private-sector financing and streamline the planning system for nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs).
    I'll believe the latter part when I see it - it should be a given that really big stuff should not be able to be held up so much, even if the trade off is allowing more hurdles for smaller scale stuff at local level.

    But private sector financing is a pretty broad description, haven't we had issues arising from that?
    Clearly Labour havent been learning the lessons. Browns PFI gig was hardly a success.
    Did it appear to be in the short term though? Because that's how a politician would tend to think on it.
    Much trumpeted at the time until the bills started rolling in. The fact remains that the borrowing cost of the government is lower than everyone else so financially it's the cheapest.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 34,982
    DM_Andy said:

    Scott_xP said:

    Pity Rishi didn't go to the football. It would have given him something to be cheerful about!

    I was expecting the helicopter to land on the pitch so he could emerge, John Terry stylee
    In full kit too, that would have been amazing.
    Now THAT is a Genny Lec stunt I could get behind.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 24,617
    DM_Andy said:

    DM_Andy said:

    We Are Premier League, We Are Premier League. I feel like I've aged about ten years in the last ten minutes. I hope Rishi feels as relieved as I do.

    And with Portsmouth moving up to the Championship, Hampshire Constabulary are probably also very relieved.

    Well done you, much as I resent saying it.
    I don't mind most Pompey fans, it's really only the one with the bell that gets my goat. I understand he's not that popular even on his own side, that true?

    Is he called Steve Bray by any chance ?
  • Options
    AlsoLeiAlsoLei Posts: 1,367

    Pity Rishi didn't go to the football. It would have given him something to be cheerful about!

    Do we actually know that he wasn't there? He was out and about in Stanmore and Harrow, earlier - so not too far from Wembley.
  • Options
    DM_AndyDM_Andy Posts: 1,048
    Scott_xP said:

    kle4 said:

    I still find the Corbyn years a little inexplicable. I get that people were looking for something different and Corbyn definitely offered that, and he had a kind of unassuming manner which I can see being appealing, but the level of fervour from his supporters was astonishing when he was just saying the same things he'd been saying since the 1980s (which was part of his pitch). It's not as though what he was offering was new, it had been offered before by others in the party.

    As I've said a part of me would like to see him win for the humour value, but if he loses it's a bit of a grubby end, kicked out of the party he was part of his whole life and without even much following within it as the MPs will be so grateful to Starmer for returning them to power.

    Counterfactual. What if one of the other loony lefties had been picked to fight the leadership election that year and also won?

    Would they have been as inept, and terrorist adjacent as Jezza turned out to be?
    Well, Corbyn didn't want to stand, the plan was to nominate Lisa Nandy but she'd just had her baby. If Nandy had stood then she would have come 3rd and Burnham would have won. There's no other left wing candidate that could have beaten Burnham or Cooper.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 26,733

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    "a must read" - for a sick parrot?
    4 letters, often found at the bottom of bird cages.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 94,460
    AlsoLei said:

    Pity Rishi didn't go to the football. It would have given him something to be cheerful about!

    Do we actually know that he wasn't there? He was out and about in Stanmore and Harrow, earlier - so not too far from Wembley.
    From what I gather he travels everywhere by helicopter, even to the local shops, and that's terrible, so I'm sure someone would have noticed.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,770
    DM_Andy said:

    DM_Andy said:

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    He's not wrong, SKS will clearly be more left-wing than Blair and Brown's premiership was only a very slight touch more left-wing. I would order the Prime Ministers since the 1970s as Brown-Blair-Johnson-Cameron-Major-May-Thatcher-Sunak-Truss

    Serious question for clarity. Is that list in terms of how left wing they were or your personal preference good/bad?
    left to right
    Cheers. The only oen I think I would disagree with is Sunak. I think he is much further to the left economically than almost any opf the Tory PMs with the possible exception of Johnson.

  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 13,311
    Afternoon all :)

    If Southampton do beat Leeds, perhaps the latter will sack Daniel Farke and he can go back to the Canaries, take them back to the Premiership and get them relegated again.

    People say history never repeats...

    @Leon and I rarely engage but yesterday he agreed with me terms like "left" and "right", in a political context, should be banned from this site. Apart from their use as perjoratives, they have lost all meaning.

    He argued rightly for a new political topography - it's hard to know where to start but if we are going to make our politics relevant for the future we have to ditch the ideological irrelevancies of the past.
  • Options
    algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 11,588
    kle4 said:

    I still find the Corbyn years a little inexplicable. I get that people were looking for something different and Corbyn definitely offered that, and he had a kind of unassuming manner which I can see being appealing, but the level of fervour from his supporters was astonishing when he was just saying the same things he'd been saying since the 1980s (which was part of his pitch). It's not as though what he was offering was new, it had been offered before by others in the party.

    As I've said a part of me would like to see him win for the humour value, but if he loses it's a bit of a grubby end, kicked out of the party he was part of his whole life and without even much following within it as the MPs will be so grateful to Starmer for returning them to power.

    The level of fervour is explained by a unique circumstance. The hard left is always with us, but its nature means it is generally only of marginal significance. In general its leaders, movers and shakers don't actually want to be in a position to run the country because that involves taking responsibility and being accountable and having to practice the theories which of course don't actually work. OTOH lots of leftie punters and fellow travellers are quite keen on all the free stuff and are naive enough to think it could deliver.

    For a brief time the hard left had a chance to actually run the country. The fervour is entirely on account of this.

    Counter intuitively Truss gave us a tiny insight into what it would be like when populist utopians have a go.
  • Options
    Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,627

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    Why don't you come off the fence about Keir and tell us what you really mean, :neutral:
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 58,106
    Scott_xP said:

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
    I think this is one you're struggling with as the reality of a Labour government comes into focus somewhere deep in the annals of your mind, so instead you're trying to fingerpoint to what you're comfortable fingerpointing toward instead.

    The school operated on just a 2% gross margin last year. A 20% demand shock (everyone knows Labour is going to win) has led to a significant drop in the pupil roll for next year and that's been enough to put it into administration.

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 40,330

    Re Corbyn

    The problem with Corbyn is that he's never been on the right side of history; except when he opposed the Iraq War, Apartheid in South Africa, Poll Tax, supported miners strike, protested austerity, voted against tuition fees, stood up for Kurds/Palestinians, warned PFI would be an expensive disaster, warned against privatisation of water and rail would be a disaster.

    Always wrong. Prsumably the good people of Islington North will realise the Private Health CEO is the way to go

    The lovely little fellow that you admire so much voted against the Anglo-Irish agreement in 1985; one of the first (and creekiest) stepping stones towards peace in Northern Ireland. He never condemned IRA bombings. He refused to say if he had had a Covid vaccination.

    Most of all, he invited convicted IRA volunteers to parliament just weeks after the Brighton bombing. A move that was both immoral and nasty.

    Then there's the hoary aspects of his anti-Semitism - which I know you're blind to. In fact, I know you threaten PBers with Corbyn's legal team even if we have the temerity to call Corbyn what he is: an anti-Semite.

    So 'on the right side of history' is, I think, true only if you are blind to history. Or morality.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 34,982

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.

    Labour's VAT policy wouldn't happen if your team hadn't so completely failed.

    Credit where it's due...
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,072
    Evening all.

    I like this thread leader from @TSE

    However, the final part can just as easily work the opposite way. And I would suggest almost everyone is missing this.

    'That more people would be unhappy with Starmer winning the election than happy it is further proof that Starmer and his government might become very unpopular quite quickly.’

    But but but. If you start out with very low expectations and low personal ratings and if you do have some character and substance to you, then you might surprise on the upside.

    I am beginning to believe this will be the case. People are terribly jaded and tired right now. Downright seething with the tories, yes, but also weary of politics and politicians generally.

    Supposing that after the shitshow, and let’s not kid ourselves that it has been anything but, it’s very possible that Labour will be competent.

    I suspect they’re going to surprise on the upside for at least one term and that they may do extremely well at the following General Election, especially if the tories are down a rabbit hole.

    It’s in 6-9 years time that the Labour decline will have begun, not years 1-5.

    You heard it here first.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,072
    edited May 26
    p.s. A very good double page spread on Starmer in today’s Sunday Times. Worth reading, not least because Starmer is quite an enigmatic politician.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 40,330

    Scott_xP said:

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
    I think this is one you're struggling with as the reality of a Labour government comes into focus somewhere deep in the annals of your mind, so instead you're trying to fingerpoint to what you're comfortable fingerpointing toward instead.

    The school operated on just a 2% gross margin last year. A 20% demand shock (everyone knows Labour is going to win) has led to a significant drop in the pupil roll for next year and that's been enough to put it into administration.

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.
    If it helps, I think the scenario you present is all too plausible. I'm sorry that it's happened, and for the parents, pupils and teachers affected.

    The pushback you're getting on this is interesting.
  • Options
    Daveyboy1961Daveyboy1961 Posts: 3,627
    Farooq said:

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    Why don't you come off the fence about Keir and tell us what you really mean, :neutral:
    STOP THIS BULLYING
    no need to shout, it was a joke, based on his pathological hatred of SKS.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 26,733
    You'll agree if you agree, but Patrick Flynn in the Speccie sums up Sunak's national service policy very eloquently:

    His resort to the old right-wing rallying cry of ‘bring back national service’ echoes the final move of his disastrous cabinet reshuffle last autumn – making the GB News presenter Esther McVey his ‘minister for common sense’. It is a gimmick from a posh liberal who thinks the plebs can be won over with eye-catching superficiality because they are too dim to notice that the important decisions are all going in the other direction.

    Summoning up the spirit of Sir John Junor and Alf Garnett is hardly an effective counterweight to telling police to stop arresting so many criminals because the jails are overflowing or presiding over yet another year of recklessly excessive immigration that trashes social cohesion. Or indeed taking people for fools when it comes to the prospects of his flagship Rwanda removals plan.

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-national-service-plan-is-a-patronising-gimmick/

    That's why it won't work in a nutshell. Sunak is an insider of Britain's broken system of a social democratic consensus to his core, as is Starmer. That leaves zero room for manoeuvre, because as Truss found, genuinely breaking the consensus is going to be fought tooth and nail. So we're left with common sense tsars, flights to Rwanda that will never happen, and increasing restrictions on civil liberties gussied up as patriotic interventions on behalf of our beleaguered bobbies. The consensus will let you have any policy, as long as it's what they sort of wanted anyway.

    And people are getting wise to it. That's why they don't like particularly like Starmer, and why they won't trust Sunak.
  • Options
    DougSealDougSeal Posts: 12,217
    Between 1996 and 2019, a generation in anyone’s books, the Tories had a working majority in Parliament for just over 2 years. In a late 20th/early 21st century context the Tory majority of the last 4.5 years has been an aberration facilitated by an Corbyn and those who enabled him.
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 13,311
    Corbyn was a prime example of choosing a leader you want rather than one which the voters might want.

    The Conservatives did the same with Iain Duncan Smith and to an extent Michael Howard. Parties, as part of the period of internal reflection, need almost a period to find themselves before they go looking for the rest of us.

    It needs a new membership, which has no experience of Government but hates Opposition, to start the road back.

    Corbyn's message did resonate with groups who had previously felt disengaged from politics - the Brexit campaign achieved a similar goal. The 2017 GE campaign will stand as a unique experience and a salutary reminder nothing in politics is certain.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 26,553
    edited May 26

    Scott_xP said:

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
    I think this is one you're struggling with as the reality of a Labour government comes into focus somewhere deep in the annals of your mind, so instead you're trying to fingerpoint to what you're comfortable fingerpointing toward instead.

    The school operated on just a 2% gross margin last year. A 20% demand shock (everyone knows Labour is going to win) has led to a significant drop in the pupil roll for next year and that's been enough to put it into administration.

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.
    The reduction in pre school numbers is going to be the problem here - that 2% gross margin is highlighting to me different issues that you are choosing to ignore while the school is pointing out a different issue to justify the closure.

    And I saw the exact games played here when the local private school gave up the ghost a few years ago.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 58,106
    Scott_xP said:

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.

    Labour's VAT policy wouldn't happen if your team hadn't so completely failed.

    Credit where it's due...
    Lol. Fantastic!
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 58,106
    eek said:

    Scott_xP said:

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
    I think this is one you're struggling with as the reality of a Labour government comes into focus somewhere deep in the annals of your mind, so instead you're trying to fingerpoint to what you're comfortable fingerpointing toward instead.

    The school operated on just a 2% gross margin last year. A 20% demand shock (everyone knows Labour is going to win) has led to a significant drop in the pupil roll for next year and that's been enough to put it into administration.

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.
    The reduction in pre school numbers is going to be the problem here - that 2% gross margin is highlighting to me different issues that you are choosing to ignore...
    You can't ignore the impact of your policy, although you'd like to do so.

    It's the difference between the school surviving a bad year, and not surviving at all.

    A 20% price shock is significant and reshapes the market.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,085
    So we are all upstanding members of society. For those with them no one is going to tell their boss/best mate/wife/co-worker to fuck off.

    So where do such people go to vent.

    PB is where.

    And that's why we're here. I mean if people can rub along with all of @Chris' bollocks they can handle @casino going off on one.
  • Options
    StuartinromfordStuartinromford Posts: 15,677

    DM_Andy said:

    DM_Andy said:

    We Are Premier League, We Are Premier League. I feel like I've aged about ten years in the last ten minutes. I hope Rishi feels as relieved as I do.

    And with Portsmouth moving up to the Championship, Hampshire Constabulary are probably also very relieved.

    Well done you, much as I resent saying it.
    I don't mind most Pompey fans, it's really only the one with the bell that gets my goat. I understand he's not that popular even on his own side, that true?

    Is he called Steve Bray by any chance ?
    No, but he changed his middle name to "Portsmouth Football Club" which tells you all you need to know.

    Was a harmless eccentric, but does seem to have gone off the deep end.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 58,106

    Farooq said:

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    Why don't you come off the fence about Keir and tell us what you really mean, :neutral:
    STOP THIS BULLYING
    no need to shout, it was a joke, based on his pathological hatred of SKS.
    I think he was joking too, but I thought your remark quite funny.

    It's not pathological hatred: I just strongly dislike his politics, think people have simply forgotten what a Labour government is like, and I don't particularly like him as an individual either.

    His refusal to speak to Rosie Duffield and her snubbing at his Kent campaign launch (despite being one of the nicest MPs in politics, and one of the key success stories there) being but one example.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 26,553
    edited May 26

    eek said:

    Scott_xP said:

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
    I think this is one you're struggling with as the reality of a Labour government comes into focus somewhere deep in the annals of your mind, so instead you're trying to fingerpoint to what you're comfortable fingerpointing toward instead.

    The school operated on just a 2% gross margin last year. A 20% demand shock (everyone knows Labour is going to win) has led to a significant drop in the pupil roll for next year and that's been enough to put it into administration.

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.
    The reduction in pre school numbers is going to be the problem here - that 2% gross margin is highlighting to me different issues that you are choosing to ignore...
    You can't ignore the impact of your policy, although you'd like to do so.

    It's the difference between the school surviving a bad year, and not surviving at all.

    A 20% price shock is significant and reshapes the market.
    If you have a 2% margin - it only requires a family or 2 moving out of the area and there is a problem.

    Basically all I'm seeing is a badly managed school blaming other people for their issues...
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 58,106
    eek said:

    eek said:

    Scott_xP said:

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
    I think this is one you're struggling with as the reality of a Labour government comes into focus somewhere deep in the annals of your mind, so instead you're trying to fingerpoint to what you're comfortable fingerpointing toward instead.

    The school operated on just a 2% gross margin last year. A 20% demand shock (everyone knows Labour is going to win) has led to a significant drop in the pupil roll for next year and that's been enough to put it into administration.

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.
    The reduction in pre school numbers is going to be the problem here - that 2% gross margin is highlighting to me different issues that you are choosing to ignore...
    You can't ignore the impact of your policy, although you'd like to do so.

    It's the difference between the school surviving a bad year, and not surviving at all.

    A 20% price shock is significant and reshapes the market.
    If you have a 2% margin - it only requires a family or 2 moving out of the area and there is a problem. Nothing to do with the threat of VAT which won't be implemented until 2025..
    Pathetic.
  • Options
    Scott_xPScott_xP Posts: 34,982
    I know we did it to death, but...

    @LOS_Fisher
    NEW: Sunak’s pledge to reintroduce compulsory UK national service, including assigning up to 30,000 18-year-olds to the military, was rejected *this week* by one of *his own defence ministers*

    Defence personnel minister Andrew Murrison warned of a hit to morale, headcount and resources if “potentially unwilling national service recruits” were introduced alongside Britain’s professional armed forces

    More in
    @FT
    from
    @georgewparker
    ,
    @jenwilliams_ft
    & me here 👇

    https://on.ft.com/3R1zo29
  • Options
    RobDRobD Posts: 59,457
    eek said:

    eek said:

    Scott_xP said:

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
    I think this is one you're struggling with as the reality of a Labour government comes into focus somewhere deep in the annals of your mind, so instead you're trying to fingerpoint to what you're comfortable fingerpointing toward instead.

    The school operated on just a 2% gross margin last year. A 20% demand shock (everyone knows Labour is going to win) has led to a significant drop in the pupil roll for next year and that's been enough to put it into administration.

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.
    The reduction in pre school numbers is going to be the problem here - that 2% gross margin is highlighting to me different issues that you are choosing to ignore...
    You can't ignore the impact of your policy, although you'd like to do so.

    It's the difference between the school surviving a bad year, and not surviving at all.

    A 20% price shock is significant and reshapes the market.
    If you have a 2% margin - it only requires a family or 2 moving out of the area and there is a problem.

    Basically all I'm seeing is a badly managed school blaming other people for their issues...
    Or one run as efficiently as possible and not overcharging parents. I think the point is that behaviour is already being changed, even if the policy won’t be in effect for a year or so.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 58,106

    Scott_xP said:

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
    I think this is one you're struggling with as the reality of a Labour government comes into focus somewhere deep in the annals of your mind, so instead you're trying to fingerpoint to what you're comfortable fingerpointing toward instead.

    The school operated on just a 2% gross margin last year. A 20% demand shock (everyone knows Labour is going to win) has led to a significant drop in the pupil roll for next year and that's been enough to put it into administration.

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.
    If it helps, I think the scenario you present is all too plausible. I'm sorry that it's happened, and for the parents, pupils and teachers affected.

    The pushback you're getting on this is interesting.
    The pushback I'm getting is because absolutely no-one wants to hear anything negative about Keir Starmer and our prospective new Labour government.
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,072
    edited May 26
    I haven’t really paid attention to Schoolgate on here and I’m not going to start now, particularly as it seems to be getting very personal which isn’t good.

    But generally I don’t see why private schools should be VAT exempt or benefit from charitable status as many (most) do.

    They are businesses and if you wish to use their services you are fully entitled to do so. And pay VAT.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 79,291
    edited May 26
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2024/05/26/rachel-reeves-labour-british-sovereign-wealth-fund-norway/

    That's not a wealth fund, that's is a centrised PFI scheme.

    Wealth funds take excess capital, invest it in business all around the world to make a return and distribute some of the profits to people of the country. This is take bankers money and spend it on things the private sector wouldn't fund if it was a business and of course they will want a return for that investment. No wonder the bankers are keen.
  • Options
    Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 26,733
    ...
    Farooq said:

    You'll agree if you agree, but Patrick Flynn in the Speccie sums up Sunak's national service policy very eloquently:

    His resort to the old right-wing rallying cry of ‘bring back national service’ echoes the final move of his disastrous cabinet reshuffle last autumn – making the GB News presenter Esther McVey his ‘minister for common sense’. It is a gimmick from a posh liberal who thinks the plebs can be won over with eye-catching superficiality because they are too dim to notice that the important decisions are all going in the other direction.

    Summoning up the spirit of Sir John Junor and Alf Garnett is hardly an effective counterweight to telling police to stop arresting so many criminals because the jails are overflowing or presiding over yet another year of recklessly excessive immigration that trashes social cohesion. Or indeed taking people for fools when it comes to the prospects of his flagship Rwanda removals plan.

    https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/this-national-service-plan-is-a-patronising-gimmick/

    That's why it won't work in a nutshell. Sunak is an insider of Britain's broken system of a social democratic consensus to his core, as is Starmer. That leaves zero room for manoeuvre, because as Truss found, genuinely breaking the consensus is going to be fought tooth and nail. So we're left with common sense tsars, flights to Rwanda that will never happen, and increasing restrictions on civil liberties gussied up as patriotic interventions on behalf of our beleaguered bobbies. The consensus will let you have any policy, as long as it's what they sort of wanted anyway.

    And people are getting wise to it. That's why they don't like particularly like Starmer, and why they won't trust Sunak.
    Doctor LuckyGuy is in

    Background: 14 years of Conservative rule
    Symptoms: (to many to list here: see attached Appendices I to XXVI)
    Diagnosis: TOO MUCH SOCIAL DEMOCRACY
    Prescription: More leeches! Another lurch to the right
    You're diagnosing too much red-in-tooth -and-claw-Toryism, when we have the highest tax burden since World War II? Ok ducks.
  • Options
    JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 40,330

    Farooq said:

    An actually surprisingly good piece by Boris Johnson in the Mail yesterday - a must read:

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-13456697/Boris-Johnson-Keir-Starmer-dangerous-left-wing-1970s.html


    Why don't you come off the fence about Keir and tell us what you really mean, :neutral:
    STOP THIS BULLYING
    no need to shout, it was a joke, based on his pathological hatred of SKS.
    I think he was joking too, but I thought your remark quite funny.

    It's not pathological hatred: I just strongly dislike his politics, think people have simply forgotten what a Labour government is like, and I don't particularly like him as an individual either.

    His refusal to speak to Rosie Duffield and her snubbing at his Kent campaign launch (despite being one of the nicest MPs in politics, and one of the key success stories there) being but one example.
    I don't actually know how anyone could 'hate' SKS (*). He's so vanilla and boring he makes Major look lively and energetic. There's no reason to hate him, so far. But there's also little to go Yay! about either. He comes across as grey and boring.

    Which might just be what the country needs atm after the least three. Having said that, May was fairly grey...

    (*) Unless they know him and have a personal grudge because he once stole a Laughing Cow at morning break... ;)
  • Options
    HeathenerHeathener Posts: 7,072
    eek said:

    eek said:

    Scott_xP said:

    For the Conservatives to lose to him... that means the public must really hate the Tories.

    And they do. And a lot of it is utterly self-inflicted.

    To return to Casino's school problem for a moment (sorry), if we accept the premise that the school is closing "because Labour are going to win", then the blame for that falls squarely on

    BoZo
    Truss
    Richi

    Casino should be focusing his righteous anger on those cretins for screwing the pooch so completely
    I think this is one you're struggling with as the reality of a Labour government comes into focus somewhere deep in the annals of your mind, so instead you're trying to fingerpoint to what you're comfortable fingerpointing toward instead.

    The school operated on just a 2% gross margin last year. A 20% demand shock (everyone knows Labour is going to win) has led to a significant drop in the pupil roll for next year and that's been enough to put it into administration.

    That wouldn't have happened were it not for Labour's VAT on private schools policy. It's killed it off.
    The reduction in pre school numbers is going to be the problem here - that 2% gross margin is highlighting to me different issues that you are choosing to ignore...
    You can't ignore the impact of your policy, although you'd like to do so.

    It's the difference between the school surviving a bad year, and not surviving at all.

    A 20% price shock is significant and reshapes the market.
    If you have a 2% margin - it only requires a family or 2 moving out of the area and there is a problem.

    Basically all I'm seeing is a badly managed school blaming other people for their issues...
    Yep absolutely. A lot of private schools, especially the smaller ones, have been close to the wire for a few years. In large part because this Conservative Gov’t screwed the economy as well as external factors such as Putin's war in Ukraine (which Biden and Boris partly greenlit but that’s another story).

    Lifting VAT exemption may be the final nail for these small schools but it is only the final nail following many prior.
This discussion has been closed.