So hard to defend the Beeb anymore as it constantly fails in its actual remit.
Why? Mosley did some excellent docs on medical matters, was a regular on the One Show and C4 and produced some well followed diet programmes.
I suspect the average BBC viewer is more interested in his sad passing than elections for an EU Parliament we no longer vote for and the resignation of an Israeli Cabinet Minister (though both were also covered in the News at 10)
That's the point. Thinking they are pandering to the Mail side of the audience. What happened to 'inform'?
No one is going to switch off because Mosley isn't the lead item. They are chasing phantom ratings.
Mosley was a BBC man just as much as a Mail columnist.
So hard to defend the Beeb anymore as it constantly fails in its actual remit.
Have to disagree with you on this. It was pretty much the only news I was interested in today. Still can't believe it. I listened to his radio shows very often.
Yes, he was a major author and star of TV, so dying so publicly and suddenly is news.
"I always opposed Iraq" she says, after voting for the war in Parliament.
Maybe she voted for war because she opposed Iraq?
Though I thought Clare Short resigned with Robin Cook, from memory.
She threatened to resign, then went along with it, then pretended to find a conscience two months later
That's a bit harsh. She made valid criticisms before and afterwards. Certainly not resigning was a mistake and one she regretted, and I don't know whether her reasons were die to selfishness or self doubt, but of all the senior Labour bods at the time, she was the one of the closest to being right. Two months isn't a long time. If it had taken her 2 years and she jumped for electoral reasons, then harsh criticism would be fairer. But that's not how it went.
Harsh but correct. She did NOT "always" oppose the war, seeing as how she voted FOR it when the chips were down.
"I always opposed Iraq" she says, after voting for the war in Parliament.
Maybe she voted for war because she opposed Iraq?
Though I thought Clare Short resigned with Robin Cook, from memory.
She threatened to resign, then went along with it, then pretended to find a conscience two months later
That's a bit harsh. She made valid criticisms before and afterwards. Certainly not resigning was a mistake and one she regretted, and I don't know whether her reasons were die to selfishness or self doubt, but of all the senior Labour bods at the time, she was the one of the closest to being right. Two months isn't a long time. If it had taken her 2 years and she jumped for electoral reasons, then harsh criticism would be fairer. But that's not how it went.
I find it hard to forgive the way she bent the knee so easily when Cook gave her the cover needed. IDS i similarly loathe for being an enabler. She took quite the journey from one wing of Labour to the other in her time. But yes, i accept her change of heart may have been genuine. Still not forgiving her tho.
In Irish local elections, with 698 of 949 local council seat counted (source RTE)
Fine Gail 27.8% +0.9% compared with 2019 locals Fianna Fail 24.5% - 4.9% Sinn Fein 9.9% +1.5% Labour 6.2% +0.2% Social Democrats 3.8% +1.8% Green 2.3% -2.9% Solidarity & People Before Profit 1.0% -0.2% Aontu 0.9% +0.5% Other parties 20.0% +0.5% Independents 3.5% +2.6%
EDIT - note CORRECTION re: FG gain since last election.
Biggest losers (so far) are FF and Green, with Independents, Labour and . . . SF!
Note that SF was expected based on polling to do far better than 2019, which was NOT a good year for them. However, the recent failed referendums which they endorsed but their base did NOT really changed their trajectory.
All the political parties endorsed the referendums, except the small conservative/Catholic parties which themselves only added a few per cent. My reading is that the base split with SF over immigration, and the waverers were swayed by income growth keeping up with dropping euro area inflation. It also appears that the personal leadership focus of their campaign was NOT a winner in the absence of policies or a reason to change.
So hard to defend the Beeb anymore as it constantly fails in its actual remit.
Have to disagree with you on this. It was pretty much the only news I was interested in today. Still can't believe it. I listened to his radio shows very often.
Yes, he was a major author and star of TV, so dying so publicly and suddenly is news.
I see Alan Hansen sounds pretty poorly.
And the human story here hits home. Most of us have taken that sort of slightly risky walk on holiday. A fair few of us have probably got into a spot of bother, but then got away with it.
Oh here we fucking go. This is why I think reform are just like the right wing version of the more mental wing of Corbynism. Just shut the fuck up Nigel you sad piss-streaked nicotine-caked drunken old twat.
This is why I wasn't sure that Farage leading Reform would be such a bad thing for the Tories. They seemed much more benign to the casual voter before he got involved again.
"I always opposed Iraq" she says, after voting for the war in Parliament.
Maybe she voted for war because she opposed Iraq?
Though I thought Clare Short resigned with Robin Cook, from memory.
She threatened to resign, then went along with it, then pretended to find a conscience two months later
That's a bit harsh. She made valid criticisms before and afterwards. Certainly not resigning was a mistake and one she regretted, and I don't know whether her reasons were die to selfishness or self doubt, but of all the senior Labour bods at the time, she was the one of the closest to being right. Two months isn't a long time. If it had taken her 2 years and she jumped for electoral reasons, then harsh criticism would be fairer. But that's not how it went.
I find it hard to forgive the way she bent the knee so easily when Cook gave her the cover needed. IDS i similarly loathe for being an enabler. She took quite the journey from one wing of Labour to the other in her time. But yes, i accept her change of heart may have been genuine. Still not forgiving her tho.
That's fair enough, I'm not disputing that she deserves some blame. She did vote for it. I just feel she gets it in the neck more than some of the unrepentant sinners, which is backwards.
Oh theres very few that come out of that well. Cook, Rifkind, Kennedy but a whole raft of sinners
So hard to defend the Beeb anymore as it constantly fails in its actual remit.
Have to disagree with you on this. It was pretty much the only news I was interested in today. Still can't believe it. I listened to his radio shows very often.
Agreed. He was a high profile figure and the circumstances of his deatah also add to the news interest. It was certainly the most talked about news at work over the last 24 hours even when it started from just a small article in the evening Standard.
Everybody should leave Richard Holden alone. Assuming he wins his seat, it's more than sufficient punishment to know that he will, presumably, be obliged to have a home in Basildon or Billericay. I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
I don't think it's a dead cert that he will win the seat. If Reform have a good, local candidate (and I agree it's a big if), he looks in serious trouble.
I confess to being mystified by one of his "what can we do for the constituency" aims: Keep local people local! What on earth does he mean, I wonder? Do they have to stay in Basildon/Billericay for their holidays?
Oh, the irony:
"Born in London and moving to Essex in the early 80’s... ...I would like to ringfence the constituency in respect of:- Local housing for local people first. All new build rental stock to be offered to local people first no exceptions. All new build property to be offered at a discounted rate minimum 5% to local people who wish to buy."
Not defending him as such but only ironic if he moved into a new build property when he arrived. Otherwise he would be unaffected by his proposals.
Er... 'Local housing for local people first'? Nothing about new builds there.
You specifically quoted him saying he would achieve that by prioritising local access to New Builds.
Read your own post.
I just quoted his own webpage. The bullet marks didn't come across but 'Local housing for local people first' is a standalone point. Read it yourself:
"I always opposed Iraq" she says, after voting for the war in Parliament.
Maybe she voted for war because she opposed Iraq?
Though I thought Clare Short resigned with Robin Cook, from memory.
She threatened to resign, then went along with it, then pretended to find a conscience two months later
That's a bit harsh. She made valid criticisms before and afterwards. Certainly not resigning was a mistake and one she regretted, and I don't know whether her reasons were die to selfishness or self doubt, but of all the senior Labour bods at the time, she was the one of the closest to being right. Two months isn't a long time. If it had taken her 2 years and she jumped for electoral reasons, then harsh criticism would be fairer. But that's not how it went.
I find it hard to forgive the way she bent the knee so easily when Cook gave her the cover needed. IDS i similarly loathe for being an enabler. She took quite the journey from one wing of Labour to the other in her time. But yes, i accept her change of heart may have been genuine. Still not forgiving her tho.
That's fair enough, I'm not disputing that she deserves some blame. She did vote for it. I just feel she gets it in the neck more than some of the unrepentant sinners, which is backwards.
Oh theres very few that come out of that well. Cook, Rifkind, Kennedy but a whole raft of sinners
If Ken Clarke had been Tory leader, it would have been much harder for Blair to position himself the way he did.
"I always opposed Iraq" she says, after voting for the war in Parliament.
Maybe she voted for war because she opposed Iraq?
Though I thought Clare Short resigned with Robin Cook, from memory.
She threatened to resign, then went along with it, then pretended to find a conscience two months later
That's a bit harsh. She made valid criticisms before and afterwards. Certainly not resigning was a mistake and one she regretted, and I don't know whether her reasons were die to selfishness or self doubt, but of all the senior Labour bods at the time, she was the one of the closest to being right. Two months isn't a long time. If it had taken her 2 years and she jumped for electoral reasons, then harsh criticism would be fairer. But that's not how it went.
I find it hard to forgive the way she bent the knee so easily when Cook gave her the cover needed. IDS i similarly loathe for being an enabler. She took quite the journey from one wing of Labour to the other in her time. But yes, i accept her change of heart may have been genuine. Still not forgiving her tho.
That's fair enough, I'm not disputing that she deserves some blame. She did vote for it. I just feel she gets it in the neck more than some of the unrepentant sinners, which is backwards.
Oh theres very few that come out of that well. Cook, Rifkind, Kennedy but a whole raft of sinners
If Ken Clarke had been Tory leader, it would have been much harder for Blair to position himself the way he did.
At the 1983 election Labour got 27.6% and 209 seats and the SDP/Liberal Alliance 25.4% and 23 seats. Maybe the same sort of thing could happen wrt the Tories and RefUK.
Oh here we fucking go. This is why I think reform are just like the right wing version of the more mental wing of Corbynism. Just shut the fuck up Nigel you sad piss-streaked nicotine-caked drunken old twat.
This is why I wasn't sure that Farage leading Reform would be such a bad thing for the Tories. They seemed much more benign to the casual voter before he got involved again.
Since his heyday we’ve:
- Brexited, neutralising and causing a little brand damage to his signature policy - Seen and been revolted by the rise of Trump - Witnessed the bloody invasion of a European country by his hero
So his appeal to most voters is surely pretty limited. But I can’t see him really exciting a new generation of right wingers either. He’s not a renowned anti-vaxxer or misogynist like Andrew Tate or a proper Putin shill like Tucker Carlson. He’s an old school golf club racist type.
"I always opposed Iraq" she says, after voting for the war in Parliament.
Maybe she voted for war because she opposed Iraq?
Though I thought Clare Short resigned with Robin Cook, from memory.
She threatened to resign, then went along with it, then pretended to find a conscience two months later
That's a bit harsh. She made valid criticisms before and afterwards. Certainly not resigning was a mistake and one she regretted, and I don't know whether her reasons were die to selfishness or self doubt, but of all the senior Labour bods at the time, she was the one of the closest to being right. Two months isn't a long time. If it had taken her 2 years and she jumped for electoral reasons, then harsh criticism would be fairer. But that's not how it went.
I find it hard to forgive the way she bent the knee so easily when Cook gave her the cover needed. IDS i similarly loathe for being an enabler. She took quite the journey from one wing of Labour to the other in her time. But yes, i accept her change of heart may have been genuine. Still not forgiving her tho.
That's fair enough, I'm not disputing that she deserves some blame. She did vote for it. I just feel she gets it in the neck more than some of the unrepentant sinners, which is backwards.
Oh theres very few that come out of that well. Cook, Rifkind, Kennedy but a whole raft of sinners
Corbyn. He apologised on behalf of Labour when he was leader.
Corbyn's implicit assumption of a peaceful transfer of power upon Saddam's inevitable fall from office is berserk. At best, Saddam would have died after uncharacteristically leaving his subjects unmolested for several years, and then Baathists and jihadists and Iranians would have started shooting regardless of that wicked Mr Blair.
Labour throws out proposal to bring back cap on tax - free pensions
Can you trust anything they say ?
That's a huge stretch Big_G.
As the article points out Labour said they intended to reintroduce the Lifetime Allowance "but had not come up with details of how the allowance, a complex piece of tax legislation, could be reinstated."
I know you are looking for a straw or two but really, this is not one.
Sorry but Reeves has abandoned the change and it has been welcomed by the BMA among others
It will not be reinstated by Labour and it is not in their manifesto to do so
Struggling to see the problem here.
Just another u turn
Wheels are coming off Labour's campaign tonight, eh! ;-)
Don't listen to Big G, he's just ardently campaigning for a Plaid Cymru victory.
You will know I am voting Lib Dem in 10 days if you have followed my posts
Like a lot of decent Conservatives. Well done, Big G. There seem to be quite a lot of them round my way.
I have a feeling - based on nothing in particular except a lot of the individual constituency numbers in the MRPs being very close - that the Tories are going to keep a lot of seats by tiny majorities. A major story of the election may be one of very near LibDem and Labour misses.
Oh here we fucking go. This is why I think reform are just like the right wing version of the more mental wing of Corbynism. Just shut the fuck up Nigel you sad piss-streaked nicotine-caked drunken old twat.
This is why I wasn't sure that Farage leading Reform would be such a bad thing for the Tories. They seemed much more benign to the casual voter before he got involved again.
Since his heyday we’ve:
- Brexited, neutralising and causing a little brand damage to his signature policy - Seen and been revolted by the rise of Trump - Witnessed the bloody invasion of a European country by his hero
So his appeal to most voters is surely pretty limited. But I can’t see him really exciting a new generation of right wingers either. He’s not a renowned anti-vaxxer or misogynist like Andrew Tate or a proper Putin shill like Tucker Carlson. He’s an old school golf club racist type.
He's also an uncollegiate, bone idle, grifter. That works when you are a maverick on the outside looking in and only need to worry about your next TV appearance. It doesn't work when you are doing the hard yards of opposition.
In Irish local elections, with 698 of 949 local council seat counted (source RTE)
Fine Gail 27.8% +0.9% compared with 2019 locals Fianna Fail 24.5% - 4.9% Sinn Fein 9.9% +1.5% Labour 6.2% +0.2% Social Democrats 3.8% +1.8% Green 2.3% -2.9% Solidarity & People Before Profit 1.0% -0.2% Aontu 0.9% +0.5% Other parties 20.0% +0.5% Independents 3.5% +2.6%
EDIT - note CORRECTION re: FG gain since last election.
Biggest losers (so far) are FF and Green, with Independents, Labour and . . . SF!
Note that SF was expected based on polling to do far better than 2019, which was NOT a good year for them. However, the recent failed referendums which they endorsed but their base did NOT really changed their trajectory.
All the political parties endorsed the referendums, except the small conservative/Catholic parties which themselves only added a few per cent. My reading is that the base split with SF over immigration, and the waverers were swayed by income growth keeping up with dropping euro area inflation. It also appears that the personal leadership focus of their campaign was NOT a winner in the absence of policies or a reason to change.
You are correct, basically. However, support by SF leadership but NOT by SF base & leaner, was particularly embarrassing for party that touts its connect with the base. Think it crystalized the discontent due to issues you note, plus housing cost plus lack of it.
Plus perhaps the War on Woke? Might be one explanation for uptick for Anontu the anti-abortion party, a socially-conservative splitter from SF you referenced.
with 759 of 949 (80%) of council seats elected from Muff to Monaseed
Party Elected % of Total FF 186 24.5% -4.9% change from 2019 FG 202 26.6% -0.3% SF 80 10.5% +2.0% LAB 47 6.2% +0.2% GRN 18 2.4% -2.8% SD 32 4.2% +2.2% SOL 3 0.4% 0.0% PBP 6 0.8% +0.1% AON 7 0.9% 0.6% Oth 27 3.6% 3.6% Ind 151 19.9% 0.4% total 759 100.0% 0.0%
"I always opposed Iraq" she says, after voting for the war in Parliament.
Maybe she voted for war because she opposed Iraq?
Though I thought Clare Short resigned with Robin Cook, from memory.
She threatened to resign, then went along with it, then pretended to find a conscience two months later
That's a bit harsh. She made valid criticisms before and afterwards. Certainly not resigning was a mistake and one she regretted, and I don't know whether her reasons were die to selfishness or self doubt, but of all the senior Labour bods at the time, she was the one of the closest to being right. Two months isn't a long time. If it had taken her 2 years and she jumped for electoral reasons, then harsh criticism would be fairer. But that's not how it went.
I find it hard to forgive the way she bent the knee so easily when Cook gave her the cover needed. IDS i similarly loathe for being an enabler. She took quite the journey from one wing of Labour to the other in her time. But yes, i accept her change of heart may have been genuine. Still not forgiving her tho.
That's fair enough, I'm not disputing that she deserves some blame. She did vote for it. I just feel she gets it in the neck more than some of the unrepentant sinners, which is backwards.
Oh theres very few that come out of that well. Cook, Rifkind, Kennedy but a whole raft of sinners
If Ken Clarke had been Tory leader, it would have been much harder for Blair to position himself the way he did.
True enough, i just like Rifkind more!
Yours truly once shook hands with Sir Malcolm (as I called him) when he was running in 2001 GE and trying to win back his former seat in Edinburgh South.
Was driving into town when I happened to see him on he street, looking just like he looked on the news, in shirtsleeves with a tie. He was baffled how I (obviously American) knew who he was. He was canvassing voters (who were NOT swarming the sidewalk at the moment) along with a young campaign work also in shirt & tie. Asked me at least twice IF I had a vote, which I didn't. I soon left so he could get back to contacting actual voters.
Saw him on TV that night in my room at my B&B where the owner was planning to vote for him. Not sure about her very friendly cat.
When Corbyn was Labour leader I stupidly dreamed of the Lib Dems overtaking the Labour Party. Now it looks like Farage could engineer the Lib Dems' replacing the Conservatives as main opposition, even if only for one parliament - something I had never even thought to dream of. A few thoughts that quickly descend into the surreal - sorry for the long list:
1. Let's assume that Reform has a very good night. Not only does Farage win in Clacton, but up to ten other Reform MPs get elected. In such a scenario they still have fewer seats than not only the Lib Dems, but also the Rump Conservatives and the SNP. MPs from both Reform and the Rump Conservatives would have no influence on the policies shaping the nation, and would receive media attention only as a fascinating freak show.
2. I strongly suspect that all the Reform MPs, aside from Farage himself, will not remain in that party by the end of the next parliament. Some will get into a disagreement with Farage and get thrown out; others will be revealed to have said ghastly things on social media; the rest could just be a bunch of Jared O'Maras and collapse out of parliament.
3. Farage himself does not seem to have the political attention span to devise policy proposals. His use is as a destructive missile aimed at specific grievances. Anyone who attempts to work with him to devise policy will inevitably fall out with him unless they are utterly subservient.
4. In such a parliament there is therefore no attraction for the Rump Conservatives to ally in parliament with Reform in any formal or long-term way.
5. The Rump-Cons could on the other hand find themselves increasingly voting with the leader of the opposition, Sir Ed Davey, against an overwhelmingly powerful goverment that is likely to be instinctively statist, interventionist and authoritarian (I anticipate most Rump-Cons in opposition quickly to become more civil-libertarian). This seems more likely when one considers who the Rump-Con MPs are individually likely to be. One could even imagine a splinter group from one party joining other (Rump-Con to Lib Dem or vice versa).
6. The centre-right therefore seems less likely to be captured by Farage's merry men and more likely to be captured by Orange Bookers. As an Orange Book fan myself (I think there are ver few in existence now, but thankfully one could still be Ed Davey), I'd be very happy with this. But I'm not sure that the nationalist right are fully thinking through their revolution under Nigel Farage's banner. They are forgetting that parliaments come in between elections, and they are forgetting the nature of Nigel Farage himself.
This genuinely feels like uncharted territory for the UK. Maybe looking at it from the perspective of parties is wrong this time. Maybe think about segments of voter opinion instead. The young and progressive want to kick the Tories and are happy to try Labour and possibly the Greens. Where do small-c social conservatives go? Lots also want to kick the Tories. Do they abstain, go for the Lib Dems or hold their noses and go for Reform? On the basis of how UKIP built support as a slow burn over a series of EU elections, I think a lot will start to do the latter. Will the Tories then row back to the right in opposition to rebuild their coalition or will they assume a more Cameronian middle solution will gather enough votes to make up those lost? Will Reform find a way to become respectable? Is Farage our Marine Le Pen? [Edit: my dyslexic typing mistakes]
What's the point of a Labour government that doesn't put up taxes? Especially income tax.
A major one this time around will be to make sure the UK remains a country that has an independent judiciary and a fundamental respect for the rule of law - domestically and internationally. One very clear trend since 2016 in the Conservative party has been a disavowal of this principle, as well as a tendency generally to remove fundamental rights from UK citizens. The admiration many Tories have for Donald Trump and Victor Orban, among others, indicates a very worrying lack of attachment to democracy within the party.
Who was it who was complaining about Newcastle/Gateshead as artificial the other day? @Anabobazina was certainly one.
Been looking at possible other jobs for Mrs Saurus including ones on the Gateshead council website. There's three, erm, points:
1. (Reason we've had to rule them all out immediately) - bizarrely it very clearly states that they will take up your references before interview. And one reference must be your current job. In other words, if you're not in the public sector already fuck you, cause who in the private sector is going to apply to somewhere that takes up your references pre-interview??? 2. Amusing thing related to that discussion - it has this to say about Gateshead: "Getting here is easy, with one of the busiest transport hubs in the region and an international airport only 20 minutes away. ". What could the name of that transport hub and airport be I wonder? 3. This may or may not be OK but feels wrong to me - on the "Why work for Gateshead Council" one of the points begins "Gateshead is Labour controlled". Now I understand that this is a legitimate reason to work for them particularly if you have a public sector mindset. But shouldn't there be some neutrality on what's meant to be basically a "local civil service" site?
What's the point of a Labour government that doesn't put up taxes? Especially income tax.
Taxes are currently higher than under any previous Labour government. What more do you want?!
I think there is a gap for Labour to exploit though - transfer the tax burden away from people in work. That would fit their overall mission to redistribute wealth more evenly.
The Spectator Index @spectatorindex BREAKING: Belgium's prime minister resigns
Yep, but that's because they had a general election at the same time as the Euros and De Croo's 7-party coalition seemed to lose their majority in the lower house. He'll stay on as caretaker until a new coalition is formed, in 2019/20 that took 494 days. Actually looks like the old coalition might have sneaked a 2 seat majority in the House.
Party Region Platform Seats
----- ------ -------- --------
N-VA (New Flemish Alliance) Flemish conservative-nationalist 24 (- 1)
Vlaams Belang Flemish far right-nationalist 20 (+ 2)
MR (Reformist Movement) Walloon conservative-liberal 20 (+ 6) *
PS (Socialist Party) Walloon social-democratic 16 (- 4) *
PVDA-PTB (Workers Party) Both marxist-socialist 15 (+ 3)
Les Engagés Walloon centrist 14 (+ 9)
Vooruit Flemish social-democratic 13 (+ 4) *
CD&V (Christian Democratic) Flemish christian-democratic 11 (- 1) *
Open VLD Flemish liberal 7 (- 5) *
Groen Flemish green-left 6 (- 2) *
Ecolo Walloon green-left 3 (-10) *
DéFi Walloon social-liberal 1 (- 1)
=========
Total 150 (+ 0)
* denotes member of the outgoing coalition
99.6% of polling places reported
Source: https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/kies24/uitslagen#kamer/het_rijk/belgie/zetelverdeling
The worry was that NVA and VB would win so many votes between them to make any practical coalition impossible and that doesn't seem to have happened this time. From a political ideology viewpoint it would make sense to ditch both green parties and bring in the French speaking centrists but that would make the government even more Walloon heavy than it is already.
In the Flemish Parliament the existing coalition (N-VA, CD&V and Open VLD) lost 13 seats and their majority, might have to widen their coalition to include the social democrats or the greens. The Walloon Parliament should probably maintain their MR-PS-Ecolo coalition though MR overtook PS as the largest party.
What's the point of a Labour government that doesn't put up taxes? Especially income tax.
A major one this time around will be to make sure the UK remains a country that has an independent judiciary and a fundamental respect for the rule of law - domestically and internationally. One very clear trend since 2016 in the Conservative party has been a disavowal of this principle, as well as a tendency generally to remove fundamental rights from UK citizens. The admiration many Tories have for Donald Trump and Victor Orban, among others, indicates a very worrying lack of attachment to democracy within the party.
Labour also should want to shift the tax burden more on to wealth than income, which would mean, as far as is possible, keeping NI and income tax roughly where they are (or even cutting if the fiscal position were much better) while raising taxes that fall on wealth like revaluation of council tax and capital gains.
Labour throws out proposal to bring back cap on tax - free pensions
Can you trust anything they say ?
That's a huge stretch Big_G.
As the article points out Labour said they intended to reintroduce the Lifetime Allowance "but had not come up with details of how the allowance, a complex piece of tax legislation, could be reinstated."
I know you are looking for a straw or two but really, this is not one.
Sorry but Reeves has abandoned the change and it has been welcomed by the BMA among others
It will not be reinstated by Labour and it is not in their manifesto to do so
Struggling to see the problem here.
Just another u turn
Wheels are coming off Labour's campaign tonight, eh! ;-)
Don't listen to Big G, he's just ardently campaigning for a Plaid Cymru victory.
You will know I am voting Lib Dem in 10 days if you have followed my posts
Like a lot of decent Conservatives. Well done, Big G. There seem to be quite a lot of them round my way.
Former Conservatives voting LibDem is going to be one of the big things this election…
I have a feeling - based on nothing in particular except a lot of the individual constituency numbers in the MRPs being very close - that the Tories are going to keep a lot of seats by tiny majorities. A major story of the election may be one of very near LibDem and Labour misses.
It’s definitely possible. The anti-Tory vote splits and they cling on as Labour did in so many seats in 2019 when the right vote split.
But, and I think it’s a reasonably sized but, 2019 was instructive for a lot of people. You have to vote smartly in this idiotic FPTP system and the tactical vote awareness is much stronger.
Then we have the other factor - LibDems in 2nd in a hundred or so Tory seats. Add in a switch into us from other parties - including the Tories - and a further splintering of their vote to Reform, and it’s on.
Either way, I agree with you that a lot of seats will be won by a small majority. Like 3 figures small.
This must be the first leadership election to take place during a general election.
The Tories must be trying to lose. I really do think now I am starting to consider that 150 seats might be too many.
It was happening on the quiet in 1997. It is a bit louder now, but heaven only knows what it will be like if the Conservative campaign continues to flounder.
I have a feeling - based on nothing in particular except a lot of the individual constituency numbers in the MRPs being very close - that the Tories are going to keep a lot of seats by tiny majorities. A major story of the election may be one of very near LibDem and Labour misses.
The polling has suggested that Labour will get larger swings in safer Tory seats. This will make Labour's vote either very efficient - winning lots of seats by small margins, or very inefficient, losing lots of seats by small margins.
Either way, we could be left with an unusually large number of marginal constituencies.
This must be the first leadership election to take place during a general election.
The Tories must be trying to lose. I really do think now I am starting to consider that 150 seats might be too many.
It was happening on the quiet in 1997. It is a bit louder now, but heaven only knows what it will be like if the Conservative campaign continues to flounder.
Why exactly should a Primary School teacher with a degree in English, Maths or Science take priority over someone who is basically literate and numerate, but is great with little kids? Or indeed one with a degree in Chinese? Who may or may not be adept with the little ones?
I think the problem is that a degree is in part a good signal of general intelligence, whereas it's very hard to credibly signal "great with little kids".
Yes. But you don't need general intelligence to work Primary. Nor Ks3 tbh. You need to be good with kids.
Yes, indeed you probably don't need a degree to teach secondary up to GCSE either, being able to connect with kids and keep them in order is probably more important.
You only really need a degree as a teacher to teach A Levels or IB
Actually. You can teach one level below your qualifications. So you can teach degree level if you have a Master's. You can teach A level if you have a degree in that subject. But then it stops. For no apparent reason.
Not true.
For a start, once you have QTS you can technically teach any subject or level.
In practice it’s more nuanced than that. You can teach GCSE if you have an A-level in that subject. Or KS3 if you have a GCSE in it, although that’s rather rarer.
However, you have to actually *have* a degree in practice to train as a teacher to start with.
Not that a degree is any guarantee of ability. Look at Sunak, Cummings, Mogg, Johnson, Braverman, Freedman, Case, Acland-Hood, Spielman and Truss. They all have degrees (indeed, Case has a doctorate) and they’re all thick as pigshit.
What's the point of a Labour government that doesn't put up taxes? Especially income tax.
A major one this time around will be to make sure the UK remains a country that has an independent judiciary and a fundamental respect for the rule of law - domestically and internationally. One very clear trend since 2016 in the Conservative party has been a disavowal of this principle, as well as a tendency generally to remove fundamental rights from UK citizens. The admiration many Tories have for Donald Trump and Victor Orban, among others, indicates a very worrying lack of attachment to democracy within the party.
Labour also should want to shift the tax burden more on to wealth than income, which would mean, as far as is possible, keeping NI and income tax roughly where they are (or even cutting if the fiscal position were much better) while raising taxes that fall on wealth like revaluation of council tax and capital gains.
x100
Good luck getting that past the cakeist grey vote though.
@Pagan2 quotes are borked but fair enough. I agree. However it is up to companies to rein in and reform their own HR departments.
What is their incentive to do so?
If they are missing out on cheap talent, that cannot easily go elsewhere then it isn't good business.
How do you prove that to them when most companies that aren't advertising min wage jobs are...must have a degree in the advert.
Hell I have applied for jobs in software engineering and been told that despite 30 years experience I am not qualified because no degree
You'll be delighted to hear the Public Sector is leading the way here. Due to the shortage of teachers, classes are increasingly being covered (and increasingly permanently led) by non-graduate HLTA's. On as little as less than £23k.
Though possibly a job where a higher level of education is relevant. Be clear here I am not saying degrees are necessarily worthless. I am merely saying there seems to be a lot of jobs that were quite happily done properly by people with o levels or a levels alone that suddenly require a degree and a load of student debt
FWIW I will hire a software engineer based on their github/track record over their degree (or lack thereof).
But my CEO will always have degree snobbery. And oxbridge snobbery, come to think of it. That will only last a short while until someone proves themselves however...
It is a bit like nepotism. Lots of people can do a job but only a chosen handful will be given the chance. I recently posted here a 1970s advert for school-leavers to work for banks, back in the days when bank manager was pillar of the community and an A-level job. Taken in aggregate, I doubt limiting opportunity in this way is good for business or Britain.
However, looked at some ways, an A-Level then was equivalent to a degree now.
It's not that long ago that a meaningful number of people left school with no qualifications whatsoever. Skip school at Easter aged 16, no exams and walk into the entriest of entry level jobs. I was at school in the 1980s, and it still happened a bit. Fixing that by moving the leaving day to late June of GCSE year was one of the dying acts of the Major government. It only came into force for the class of 1998.
From that point of view, taking A-Levels said "committed enough and academic enough to study for a couple of years beyond compulsory education". The important bit wasn't so much the content as the signalling of ability and effort.
Now, the vast majority are in education until 18; everyone is educated more than they were a few decades ago. That's a good thing. But young people who do A-Levels and then stop now aren't the same people who did A-Levels and stopped then.
But they could be if companies went back to recruiting at the appropriate level.
What's the point of a Labour government that doesn't put up taxes? Especially income tax.
A major one this time around will be to make sure the UK remains a country that has an independent judiciary and a fundamental respect for the rule of law - domestically and internationally. One very clear trend since 2016 in the Conservative party has been a disavowal of this principle, as well as a tendency generally to remove fundamental rights from UK citizens. The admiration many Tories have for Donald Trump and Victor Orban, among others, indicates a very worrying lack of attachment to democracy within the party.
Labour also should want to shift the tax burden more on to wealth than income, which would mean, as far as is possible, keeping NI and income tax roughly where they are (or even cutting if the fiscal position were much better) while raising taxes that fall on wealth like revaluation of council tax and capital gains.
x100
Good luck getting that past the cakeist grey vote though.
Polls seem to disagree on the current level of RefUK support, some polling in the high teens, some in the 10s to low teens. That's a big difference and could well be down to prompting or not prompting. RefUK have a sitting MP, they're fielding 611 candidates, and they're currently polling in excess of the Lib Dems, so would seem to have a gopd case to be prompted for rather than listed as 'other'.
Why exactly should a Primary School teacher with a degree in English, Maths or Science take priority over someone who is basically literate and numerate, but is great with little kids? Or indeed one with a degree in Chinese? Who may or may not be adept with the little ones?
I think the problem is that a degree is in part a good signal of general intelligence, whereas it's very hard to credibly signal "great with little kids".
Yes. But you don't need general intelligence to work Primary. Nor Ks3 tbh. You need to be good with kids.
Yes, indeed you probably don't need a degree to teach secondary up to GCSE either, being able to connect with kids and keep them in order is probably more important.
You only really need a degree as a teacher to teach A Levels or IB
Actually. You can teach one level below your qualifications. So you can teach degree level if you have a Master's. You can teach A level if you have a degree in that subject. But then it stops. For no apparent reason.
Not true.
For a start, once you have QTS you can technically teach any subject or level.
In practice it’s more nuanced than that. You can teach GCSE if you have an A-level in that subject. Or KS3 if you have a GCSE in it, although that’s rather rarer.
However, you have to actually *have* a degree in practice to train as a teacher to start with.
Not that a degree is any guarantee of ability. Look at Sunak, Cummings, Mogg, Johnson, Braverman, Freedman, Case, Acland-Hood, Spielman and Truss. They all have degrees (indeed, Case has a doctorate) and they’re all thick as pigshit.
That's what I was trying to say very poorly after several glasses of wine. I'm not convinced a degree is entirely essential. I've seen plenty of HLTA'S who are excellent. Plenty with QTS who aren't.
@Pagan2 quotes are borked but fair enough. I agree. However it is up to companies to rein in and reform their own HR departments.
What is their incentive to do so?
If they are missing out on cheap talent, that cannot easily go elsewhere then it isn't good business.
How do you prove that to them when most companies that aren't advertising min wage jobs are...must have a degree in the advert.
Hell I have applied for jobs in software engineering and been told that despite 30 years experience I am not qualified because no degree
You'll be delighted to hear the Public Sector is leading the way here. Due to the shortage of teachers, classes are increasingly being covered (and increasingly permanently led) by non-graduate HLTA's. On as little as less than £23k.
Though possibly a job where a higher level of education is relevant. Be clear here I am not saying degrees are necessarily worthless. I am merely saying there seems to be a lot of jobs that were quite happily done properly by people with o levels or a levels alone that suddenly require a degree and a load of student debt
FWIW I will hire a software engineer based on their github/track record over their degree (or lack thereof).
But my CEO will always have degree snobbery. And oxbridge snobbery, come to think of it. That will only last a short while until someone proves themselves however...
It is a bit like nepotism. Lots of people can do a job but only a chosen handful will be given the chance. I recently posted here a 1970s advert for school-leavers to work for banks, back in the days when bank manager was pillar of the community and an A-level job. Taken in aggregate, I doubt limiting opportunity in this way is good for business or Britain.
However, looked at some ways, an A-Level then was equivalent to a degree now.
It's not that long ago that a meaningful number of people left school with no qualifications whatsoever. Skip school at Easter aged 16, no exams and walk into the entriest of entry level jobs. I was at school in the 1980s, and it still happened a bit. Fixing that by moving the leaving day to late June of GCSE year was one of the dying acts of the Major government. It only came into force for the class of 1998.
From that point of view, taking A-Levels said "committed enough and academic enough to study for a couple of years beyond compulsory education". The important bit wasn't so much the content as the signalling of ability and effort.
Now, the vast majority are in education until 18; everyone is educated more than they were a few decades ago. That's a good thing. But young people who do A-Levels and then stop now aren't the same people who did A-Levels and stopped then.
But they could be if companies went back to recruiting at the appropriate level.
It’s suggested that the Tories will offer a further NI cut in their manifesto . Aswell as that they’re going up fees for tourist visas and work visas .
Not sure Visit Britain is going to be happy about the former . Although slashing tourist numbers might help with the lack of hospitality workers !
So hard to defend the Beeb anymore as it constantly fails in its actual remit.
Am I the only person who'd never heard of him? Given the outpourings he must have been a lovely guy, but really?
I've never heard of him either.
Indeed, for a moment I wondered if Farage had been saying something about Oswald Mosley.
Do none of you hooligans listen to Radio 4?
I'd never heard of him either. And not just 'not heard of him but recognise the name' or 'not heard of the name but actually aware of his work' in the manner of most famous people in popular culture I've never heard of - but genuinely ignorant that such a person existed. I was talking to my wife last night about this. According to a quick straw poll (me, wife, two of wife's friends), 75% of humans knew who he was and were aware of his works. Apparently he was well known among a) people who watched daytime television, and b) people who are interested in weight loss. There may therefore be a bit of a gender difference in awareness of who he is.
Why exactly should a Primary School teacher with a degree in English, Maths or Science take priority over someone who is basically literate and numerate, but is great with little kids? Or indeed one with a degree in Chinese? Who may or may not be adept with the little ones?
I think the problem is that a degree is in part a good signal of general intelligence, whereas it's very hard to credibly signal "great with little kids".
Yes. But you don't need general intelligence to work Primary. Nor Ks3 tbh. You need to be good with kids.
Yes, indeed you probably don't need a degree to teach secondary up to GCSE either, being able to connect with kids and keep them in order is probably more important.
You only really need a degree as a teacher to teach A Levels or IB
Actually. You can teach one level below your qualifications. So you can teach degree level if you have a Master's. You can teach A level if you have a degree in that subject. But then it stops. For no apparent reason.
Not true.
For a start, once you have QTS you can technically teach any subject or level.
In practice it’s more nuanced than that. You can teach GCSE if you have an A-level in that subject. Or KS3 if you have a GCSE in it, although that’s rather rarer.
However, you have to actually *have* a degree in practice to train as a teacher to start with.
Not that a degree is any guarantee of ability. Look at Sunak, Cummings, Mogg, Johnson, Braverman, Freedman, Case, Acland-Hood, Spielman and Truss. They all have degrees (indeed, Case has a doctorate) and they’re all thick as pigshit.
In my case it goes further - I teach further maths despite my highest formal maths qualification being normal A-level maths. Admittedly I've been doing it for years, which cycles right back round to dixidean's original point - I know how to get kids to learn from me.
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Someone pointed out above - age is now a specifically protected characteristic.
@PBlawyers - would this work with existing employment/human rights legislation?
Certain jobs force people to retire at a certain age and it was the quickest way to cut the numbers down in the HOL . Banning further hereditary appointments seems a good move . The 80 isn’t set in stone as those turning 80 can stay till the next election.
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Someone pointed out above - age is now a specifically protected characteristic.
@PBlawyers - would this work with existing employment/human rights legislation?
Certain jobs force people to retire at a certain age and it was the quickest way to cut the numbers down in the HOL . Banning further hereditary appointments seems a good move . The 80 isn’t set in stone as those already in the HOL over 80 can stay till the next election.
It'd be interesting if most of the over-80s are Conservative...
It’s suggested that the Tories will offer a further NI cut in their manifesto . Aswell as that they’re going up fees for tourist visas and work visas .
Not sure Visit Britain is going to be happy about the former . Although slashing tourist numbers might help with the lack of hospitality workers !
Good morning
Is anyone listening - the election is lost to them
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Someone pointed out above - age is now a specifically protected characteristic.
@PBlawyers - would this work with existing employment/human rights legislation?
Certain jobs force people to retire at a certain age and it was the quickest way to cut the numbers down in the HOL . Banning further hereditary appointments seems a good move . The 80 isn’t set in stone as those already in the HOL over 80 can stay till the next election.
It'd be interesting if most of the over-80s are Conservative...
And as ever, ask the question why this value? Why 80? Why not 90? 70? 66? Is there a reason for the figure, or has a SPAD pulled it out of his backside?
So hard to defend the Beeb anymore as it constantly fails in its actual remit.
Am I the only person who'd never heard of him? Given the outpourings he must have been a lovely guy, but really?
I've never heard of him either.
Indeed, for a moment I wondered if Farage had been saying something about Oswald Mosley.
Do none of you hooligans listen to Radio 4?
I'd never heard of him either. And not just 'not heard of him but recognise the name' or 'not heard of the name but actually aware of his work' in the manner of most famous people in popular culture I've never heard of - but genuinely ignorant that such a person existed. I was talking to my wife last night about this. According to a quick straw poll (me, wife, two of wife's friends), 75% of humans knew who he was and were aware of his works. Apparently he was well known among a) people who watched daytime television, and b) people who are interested in weight loss. There may therefore be a bit of a gender difference in awareness of who he is.
He had 15 minutes slots on Radio 4 called "Just one thing" suggesting very minor lifestyle changes that could lengthen ones life. I have adopted one or two including eating (specifically) cooked tomatoes to reduce an enlarged prostate.
Somewhat ironic that his life was cut short on one of his suggested stout daily walks. For those of us who followed his advice he is a great loss.
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Someone pointed out above - age is now a specifically protected characteristic.
@PBlawyers - would this work with existing employment/human rights legislation?
That's a can of worms.
It's difficult to argue that they are employees due to the daily allowance reward scheme etc. I'm not sure where their status falls. I think they will come under the term "office holders".
There are similar type of offices with a retirement age, such as Judges (70 or 75 with Ministerial Approval) and Church of England Bishops (70 unless Grandfathered in, and I think those were all promoted some time ago). I am not aware that these have been questioned.
Plus if it is going to some version of democratic, that would undermine such a case.
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Someone pointed out above - age is now a specifically protected characteristic.
@PBlawyers - would this work with existing employment/human rights legislation?
Certain jobs force people to retire at a certain age and it was the quickest way to cut the numbers down in the HOL . Banning further hereditary appointments seems a good move . The 80 isn’t set in stone as those turning 80 can stay till the next election.
I was just curious how that would be compatible with the existing law.
And as ever, ask the question why this value? Why 80? Why not 90? 70? 66? Is there a reason for the figure, or has a SPAD pulled it out of his backside?
Why is the pensionable age set at an arbitrary 67? Why is voting etc set at an arbitrary 18?
Best to just bin the HoL and not worry about age barriers.
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Throw out those who never attend - or those who do not regularly speak, or take part in HoL business.
There should be a retirement route, keeping the title (and potentially the 'club' rights) but relinquishing sitting and voting rights, and those who don't contribute should be encouraged to take it.
With the monolith Starmer constructed already fragmenting, not even a Labour majority as humongous as that posited in a recent YouGov poll will secure stable government. When that becomes clear, voters will abandon Britain’s derelict party system. Only if electoral reform takes place can dealing with a society headed for penury become politically possible. Or the ruins of a once first-world country beggared by its political class will go on rotting away.
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Throw out those who never attend - or those who do not regularly speak, or take part in HoL business.
There should be a retirement route, keeping the title (and potentially the 'club' rights) but relinquishing sitting and voting rights, and those who don't contribute should be encouraged to take it.
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Throw out those who never attend - or those who do not regularly speak, or take part in HoL business.
There should be a retirement route, keeping the title (and potentially the 'club' rights) but relinquishing sitting and voting rights, and those who don't contribute should be encouraged to take it.
With the monolith Starmer constructed already fragmenting, not even a Labour majority as humongous as that posited in a recent YouGov poll will secure stable government. When that becomes clear, voters will abandon Britain’s derelict party system. Only if electoral reform takes place can dealing with a society headed for penury become politically possible. Or the ruins of a once first-world country beggared by its political class will go on rotting away.
Reform: Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government everyone other than Tory twits to ignore you.
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Someone pointed out above - age is now a specifically protected characteristic.
@PBlawyers - would this work with existing employment/human rights legislation?
Age indeed is a specifically protected characteristic but, unlike the others, you can justify direct discrimination on the grounds of it being a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The leading case* on compulsory retirement ages said they could be lawful if the aim was generational fairness - in that case 65 was the retirement age in a solicitors partnership and it was held that was fair to let younger lawyers through and thus promote inter generational fairness.
You can also introduce primary legislation to circumvent the Equality Act in this specific case. I think primary legislation would be needed anyway.
* Seldon v Clarkson, Wright, and Jakes in case anyone’s interested.
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Someone pointed out above - age is now a specifically protected characteristic.
@PBlawyers - would this work with existing employment/human rights legislation?
Age indeed is a specifically protected characteristic but, unlike the others, you can justify direct discrimination on the grounds of it being a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The leading case* on compulsory retirement ages said they could be lawful if the aim was generational fairness - in that case 65 was the retirement age in a solicitors partnership and it was held that was fair to let younger lawyers through and thus promote inter generational fairness.
You can also introduce primary legislation to circumvent the Equality Act in this specific case. I think primary legislation would be needed anyway.
* Seldon v Clarkson, Wright, and Jakes in case anyone’s interested.
So hard to defend the Beeb anymore as it constantly fails in its actual remit.
Am I the only person who'd never heard of him? Given the outpourings he must have been a lovely guy, but really?
I've never heard of him either.
Indeed, for a moment I wondered if Farage had been saying something about Oswald Mosley.
Do none of you hooligans listen to Radio 4?
I'd never heard of him either. And not just 'not heard of him but recognise the name' or 'not heard of the name but actually aware of his work' in the manner of most famous people in popular culture I've never heard of - but genuinely ignorant that such a person existed. I was talking to my wife last night about this. According to a quick straw poll (me, wife, two of wife's friends), 75% of humans knew who he was and were aware of his works. Apparently he was well known among a) people who watched daytime television, and b) people who are interested in weight loss. There may therefore be a bit of a gender difference in awareness of who he is.
He had 15 minutes slots on Radio 4 called "Just one thing" suggesting very minor lifestyle changes that could lengthen ones life. I have adopted one or two including eating (specifically) cooked tomatoes to reduce an enlarged prostate.
Somewhat ironic that his life was cut short on one of his suggested stout daily walks. For those of us who followed his advice he is a great loss.
The BBC, not unreasonably, cover their own in more detail, but despite the incomprehension of not a few PBers, he was pretty well known, well beyond the circle of Daily Mail readers (and actually the Mail's science coverage can be surprisingly good).
Really liking the Labour plan for converting spare Primary classrooms, due to falling rolls, into nurseries. Seems a howlingly obvious move.
I'd rather they used falling rolls to improve staff/pupil ratios, which in turn should lead to better outcomes (and is also what private schools are paid for).
Yes I can see telling 80-year-olds they are past it will not cause any embarrassment when dealing with our major ally.
I think it should be a more nuanced approach. Many of the over 80s in the Lords are better than most of the under 80s.
Someone pointed out above - age is now a specifically protected characteristic.
@PBlawyers - would this work with existing employment/human rights legislation?
Age indeed is a specifically protected characteristic but, unlike the others, you can justify direct discrimination on the grounds of it being a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. The leading case* on compulsory retirement ages said they could be lawful if the aim was generational fairness - in that case 65 was the retirement age in a solicitors partnership and it was held that was fair to let younger lawyers through and thus promote inter generational fairness.
You can also introduce primary legislation to circumvent the Equality Act in this specific case. I think primary legislation would be needed anyway.
* Seldon v Clarkson, Wright, and Jakes in case anyone’s interested.
With the monolith Starmer constructed already fragmenting, not even a Labour majority as humongous as that posited in a recent YouGov poll will secure stable government. When that becomes clear, voters will abandon Britain’s derelict party system. Only if electoral reform takes place can dealing with a society headed for penury become politically possible. Or the ruins of a once first-world country beggared by its political class will go on rotting away.
It's all a bit bonkers, almost Dolchstoßlegende.
There's lots wrong with our country, but it really isn't fundamentally broken nor does it need some authoritarian revolution.
Really liking the Labour plan for converting spare Primary classrooms, due to falling rolls, into nurseries. Seems a howlingly obvious move.
I'd rather they used falling rolls to improve staff/pupil ratios, which in turn should lead to better outcomes (and is also what private schools are paid for).
Well. OK. But then where do the kids with no nursery place, or can't afford the sky high fees, go?
Really liking the Labour plan for converting spare Primary classrooms, due to falling rolls, into nurseries. Seems a howlingly obvious move.
I love the creativity that you sometimes get with new policies, especially when the money is tight and you need to write a manifesto. This seems like a good idea.
I hope it has been thought through properly eg is the problem physical nursery space, or staffing? I thought the latter. But I may well be wrong.
So hard to defend the Beeb anymore as it constantly fails in its actual remit.
Am I the only person who'd never heard of him? Given the outpourings he must have been a lovely guy, but really?
I've never heard of him either.
Indeed, for a moment I wondered if Farage had been saying something about Oswald Mosley.
Do none of you hooligans listen to Radio 4?
I'd never heard of him either. And not just 'not heard of him but recognise the name' or 'not heard of the name but actually aware of his work' in the manner of most famous people in popular culture I've never heard of - but genuinely ignorant that such a person existed. I was talking to my wife last night about this. According to a quick straw poll (me, wife, two of wife's friends), 75% of humans knew who he was and were aware of his works. Apparently he was well known among a) people who watched daytime television, and b) people who are interested in weight loss. There may therefore be a bit of a gender difference in awareness of who he is.
He had 15 minutes slots on Radio 4 called "Just one thing" suggesting very minor lifestyle changes that could lengthen ones life. I have adopted one or two including eating (specifically) cooked tomatoes to reduce an enlarged prostate.
Somewhat ironic that his life was cut short on one of his suggested stout daily walks. For those of us who followed his advice he is a great loss.
Indeed. His 'just one thing' programmes are usually great listening, if the original idea of being able to improve your life by making a few small changes has ended up morphing into a massive shopping list of changes that if you did them all would take over your life completely.
I see nothing in the further details released to suggest that yesterday's rash and premature suggestions of suicide have anything to them?
The weather has been unusually hot in Greece recently, even for the time of year, and he seems to have died alarmingly close to a beach resort toward which he was presumably heading.
With the monolith Starmer constructed already fragmenting, not even a Labour majority as humongous as that posited in a recent YouGov poll will secure stable government. When that becomes clear, voters will abandon Britain’s derelict party system. Only if electoral reform takes place can dealing with a society headed for penury become politically possible. Or the ruins of a once first-world country beggared by its political class will go on rotting away.
John Gray's tortured metaphors impress no one.
What's Dura's take on Starmer's "Leninist" party management ?
Really liking the Labour plan for converting spare Primary classrooms, due to falling rolls, into nurseries. Seems a howlingly obvious move.
I love the creativity that you sometimes get with new policies, especially when the money is tight and you need to write a manifesto. This seems like a good idea.
I hope it has been thought through properly eg is the problem physical nursery space, or staffing? I thought the latter. But I may well be wrong.
It's probably both. But this circles back to transferrable skills doesn't it? Fewer staff needed in primary.
Comments
I see Alan Hansen sounds pretty poorly.
Why is Labour in favour of age discrimination?
🚨 NEW: Nigel Farage has written to the British Polling Council accusing pollsters of trying to “suppress” Reform UK in their surveys"
https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/1799893557630623823
You doth protest too much for the lady.
She took quite the journey from one wing of Labour to the other in her time.
But yes, i accept her change of heart may have been genuine. Still not forgiving her tho.
- Brexited, neutralising and causing a little brand damage to his signature policy
- Seen and been revolted by the rise of Trump
- Witnessed the bloody invasion of a European country by his hero
So his appeal to most voters is surely pretty limited. But I can’t see him really exciting a new generation of right wingers either. He’s not a renowned anti-vaxxer or misogynist like Andrew Tate or a proper Putin shill like Tucker Carlson. He’s an old school golf club racist type.
Plus perhaps the War on Woke? Might be one explanation for uptick for Anontu the anti-abortion party, a socially-conservative splitter from SF you referenced.
with 759 of 949 (80%) of council seats elected from Muff to Monaseed
Party Elected % of Total
FF 186 24.5% -4.9% change from 2019
FG 202 26.6% -0.3%
SF 80 10.5% +2.0%
LAB 47 6.2% +0.2%
GRN 18 2.4% -2.8%
SD 32 4.2% +2.2%
SOL 3 0.4% 0.0%
PBP 6 0.8% +0.1%
AON 7 0.9% 0.6%
Oth 27 3.6% 3.6%
Ind 151 19.9% 0.4%
total 759 100.0% 0.0%
source RTE
Was driving into town when I happened to see him on he street, looking just like he looked on the news, in shirtsleeves with a tie. He was baffled how I (obviously American) knew who he was. He was canvassing voters (who were NOT swarming the sidewalk at the moment) along with a young campaign work also in shirt & tie. Asked me at least twice IF I had a vote, which I didn't. I soon left so he could get back to contacting actual voters.
Saw him on TV that night in my room at my B&B where the owner was planning to vote for him. Not sure about her very friendly cat.
https://www.rte.ie/radio1/podcast/podcast_yourpolitics.xml
Been looking at possible other jobs for Mrs Saurus including ones on the Gateshead council website. There's three, erm, points:
1. (Reason we've had to rule them all out immediately) - bizarrely it very clearly states that they will take up your references before interview. And one reference must be your current job. In other words, if you're not in the public sector already fuck you, cause who in the private sector is going to apply to somewhere that takes up your references pre-interview???
2. Amusing thing related to that discussion - it has this to say about Gateshead: "Getting here is easy, with one of the busiest transport hubs in the region and an international airport only 20 minutes away. ". What could the name of that transport hub and airport be I wonder?
3. This may or may not be OK but feels wrong to me - on the "Why work for Gateshead Council" one of the points begins "Gateshead is Labour controlled". Now I understand that this is a legitimate reason to work for them particularly if you have a public sector mindset. But shouldn't there be some neutrality on what's meant to be basically a "local civil service" site?
I think there is a gap for Labour to exploit though - transfer the tax burden away from people in work. That would fit their overall mission to redistribute wealth more evenly.
"Rishi Sunak’s right-wing pantomime impresses no one
The Prime Minister’s performative populism and unending U-turns are acts in a music-hall farce."
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/conservatives/2024/05/rishi-sunaks-right-wing-pantomime-impresses-no-one
"Keir Starmer’s promise of stability will come back to haunt him
With Britain in ruins, change without disruption means no change at all."
https://www.newstatesman.com/comment/2024/06/keir-starmer-promise-stability-will-come-back-haunt-him
Party Region Platform Seats ----- ------ -------- -------- N-VA (New Flemish Alliance) Flemish conservative-nationalist 24 (- 1) Vlaams Belang Flemish far right-nationalist 20 (+ 2) MR (Reformist Movement) Walloon conservative-liberal 20 (+ 6) * PS (Socialist Party) Walloon social-democratic 16 (- 4) * PVDA-PTB (Workers Party) Both marxist-socialist 15 (+ 3) Les Engagés Walloon centrist 14 (+ 9) Vooruit Flemish social-democratic 13 (+ 4) * CD&V (Christian Democratic) Flemish christian-democratic 11 (- 1) * Open VLD Flemish liberal 7 (- 5) * Groen Flemish green-left 6 (- 2) * Ecolo Walloon green-left 3 (-10) * DéFi Walloon social-liberal 1 (- 1) ========= Total 150 (+ 0) * denotes member of the outgoing coalition 99.6% of polling places reported Source: https://www.vrt.be/vrtnws/nl/kies24/uitslagen#kamer/het_rijk/belgie/zetelverdelingThe worry was that NVA and VB would win so many votes between them to make any practical coalition impossible and that doesn't seem to have happened this time. From a political ideology viewpoint it would make sense to ditch both green parties and bring in the French speaking centrists but that would make the government even more Walloon heavy than it is already.In the Flemish Parliament the existing coalition (N-VA, CD&V and Open VLD) lost 13 seats and their majority, might have to widen their coalition to include the social democrats or the greens. The Walloon Parliament should probably maintain their MR-PS-Ecolo coalition though MR overtook PS as the largest party.
But, and I think it’s a reasonably sized but, 2019 was instructive for a lot of people. You have to vote smartly in this idiotic FPTP system and the tactical vote awareness is much stronger.
Then we have the other factor - LibDems in 2nd in a hundred or so Tory seats. Add in a switch into us from other parties - including the Tories - and a further splintering of their vote to Reform, and it’s on.
Either way, I agree with you that a lot of seats will be won by a small majority. Like 3 figures small.
F1: liked the race a lot but wish the end result would've been different.
I backed Labour to win the seat at 4.5 a day or two ago. Not impossible. But would be quite the moment.
Either way, we could be left with an unusually large number of marginal constituencies.
For a start, once you have QTS you can technically teach any subject or level.
In practice it’s more nuanced than that. You can teach GCSE if you have an A-level in that subject. Or KS3 if you have a GCSE in it, although that’s rather rarer.
However, you have to actually *have* a degree in practice to train as a teacher to start with.
Not that a degree is any guarantee of ability. Look at Sunak, Cummings, Mogg, Johnson, Braverman, Freedman, Case, Acland-Hood, Spielman and Truss. They all have degrees (indeed, Case has a doctorate) and they’re all thick as pigshit.
Good luck getting that past the cakeist grey vote though.
I'm not convinced a degree is entirely essential. I've seen plenty of HLTA'S who are excellent. Plenty with QTS who aren't.
That’s the second time he’s made that speech too.
Not sure Visit Britain is going to be happy about the former . Although slashing tourist numbers might help with the lack of hospitality workers !
I was talking to my wife last night about this. According to a quick straw poll (me, wife, two of wife's friends), 75% of humans knew who he was and were aware of his works.
Apparently he was well known among a) people who watched daytime television, and b) people who are interested in weight loss. There may therefore be a bit of a gender difference in awareness of who he is.
@PBlawyers - would this work with existing employment/human rights legislation?
Is anyone listening - the election is lost to them
Somewhat ironic that his life was cut short on one of his suggested stout daily walks. For those of us who followed his advice he is a great loss.
It's difficult to argue that they are employees due to the daily allowance reward scheme etc. I'm not sure where their status falls. I think they will come under the term "office holders".
There are similar type of offices with a retirement age, such as Judges (70 or 75 with Ministerial Approval) and Church of England Bishops (70 unless Grandfathered in, and I think those were all promoted some time ago). I am not aware that these have been questioned.
Plus if it is going to some version of democratic, that would undermine such a case.
Catching up on the latest posts, I'm enjoying @Big_G_NorthWales turning into Tony Benn
Seems a howlingly obvious move.
Best to just bin the HoL and not worry about age barriers.
https://lordslibrary.parliament.uk/retirement-from-the-house-of-lords/
governmenteveryone other than Tory twits to ignore you.You can also introduce primary legislation to circumvent the Equality Act in this specific case. I think primary legislation would be needed anyway.
* Seldon v Clarkson, Wright, and Jakes in case anyone’s interested.
https://www.lefigaro.fr/politique/en-direct-europeennes-2024-apres-le-seisme-de-la-dissolution-une-campagne-legislative-eclair-demarre-20240610
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c9776r3nqv1o
The BBC, not unreasonably, cover their own in more detail, but despite the incomprehension of not a few PBers, he was pretty well known, well beyond the circle of Daily Mail readers (and actually the Mail's science coverage can be surprisingly good).
Sums up what happened, I think.
There's lots wrong with our country, but it really isn't fundamentally broken nor does it need some authoritarian revolution.
But then where do the kids with no nursery place, or can't afford the sky high fees, go?
I hope it has been thought through properly eg is the problem physical nursery space, or staffing? I thought the latter. But I may well be wrong.
I see nothing in the further details released to suggest that yesterday's rash and premature suggestions of suicide have anything to them?
The weather has been unusually hot in Greece recently, even for the time of year, and he seems to have died alarmingly close to a beach resort toward which he was presumably heading.
What's Dura's take on Starmer's "Leninist" party management ?
Fewer staff needed in primary.