If anyone is wondering why the far right is surging in Europe. And why this isn’t some transitory thing
“EXCLUSIVEHow Sweden became a 'haven' for mafia gangs and the EU's gun crime capital off the back of surging migration: As murders surge, police and politicians say the nation is at crisis point”
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
Just flicking through the Coal Authority's publications and frankly it looks like interesting and important work.
Disused colliery tip inspection is probably something we can all get behind, given prior disasters. Lots on metals pollution too.
With all these quango-bashers, it's always 'I've never heard of it; it must be useless!'.
After 14 years of cutting into the bone, there won't be many that haven't had to make multiple very solid cases for their continued existence at this point. By far the great bulk of public spending is departmental.
Sam Freedman @Samfrspare JLP show same movement to Reform as others. This is the first fully post D-Day poll and doesn't show too big a drop for the Tories (though is the methodology that helps them most and they're on 24%).
----------
The headline figures might look disappointing for Reform - but I think we are going to see crossover today/tomorrow from a polling company that has more favourable methodology to them / less favourable methodology to the Tories.
DYOR but I would lump on those trading bets right now if you can. Lib Dems over 40.5 seats still looks very good to me.
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
The big picture remains what it has been for a while now.
About a quarter of government spending is welfare payments, and about a half of that is pensions. They are essentially what they are; there's not much political space to cut the number of pensioners or the amount per pensioner, and means testing more will just discourage people from making their own provison.
About another sixth is health and social care. You could transfer that cost to individuals more directly, but the total is mostly what it is- the UK may not be getting as much bang as it likes, but it's also not putting in as much buck as comparable countries.
And every time you resign yourself to saying "no, that's not really cuttable", the percentage you have to find from other areas goes up some more. Which is why we haven't had a proper spending review for a while, which might be why we'r having the election now.
Yes that wet liberal Winston Churchill was 'abysmal' apparently he says and 'the country would be "far better" if it had "taken Hitler up on his offer of neutrality" instead of fighting the Nazis in World War Two.'
Indeed, and it’s wishful thinking that the LDs are going to suddenly morph into a centre-right orange booker party. They are liberal ‘progressive’ left and they’re not going to change overnight. Are there even any orange bookers left?
Yes, in some respects the LD manifesto is left of Starmer Labour, including a massive rise in council tax for second homes and restoration of student grants. Davey clearly trying to attract left liberals disillusioned by a centrist, authoritarian Labour Party as Kennedy did to Blair New Labour.
Clearly only Reform are a real alternative to the Tories on the right
Reform need to stop banging on about migration everybody knows where they stand, they need to put some focus on cost of living if they want to pick up extra votes.
Reform have proposed raising the IHT threshold to £2 million, clearly their focus is on anti immigration white working class Leavers and upper middle class Thatcherite rich southern rightwing home owners and their heirs
Indeed, and it’s wishful thinking that the LDs are going to suddenly morph into a centre-right orange booker party. They are liberal ‘progressive’ left and they’re not going to change overnight. Are there even any orange bookers left?
Yes, in some respects the LD manifesto is left of Starmer Labour, including a massive rise in council tax for second homes and restoration of student grants. Davey clearly trying to attract left liberals disillusioned by a centrist, authoritarian Labour Party as Kennedy did to Blair New Labour.
Clearly only Reform are a real alternative to the Tories on the right
Reform need to stop banging on about migration everybody knows where they stand, they need to put some focus on cost of living if they want to pick up extra votes.
Reform have proposed raising the IHT threshold to £2 million, clearly their focus is on anti immigration white working class Leavers and upper middle class Thatcherite rich southern rightwing home owners and their heirs
So who does that leave for the Conservatives ?
Based on the Tory manifesto, 30-40 year olds working in the private sector looking for their first home and private sector workers and the self employed who want to scrap NI.
Plus Jews still suspicious of Labour and British Hindus proud of Rishi as the first British Asian PM
Ok, I know it's ultimately an exercise in politcal irrelevancy, but which of the rich smörgåsbord of talent on the Holyrood benches is next SCon leader? I'm going for Sandesh 'does my hair look good' Gulhane, with a lol saver on Annie Wells.
Murdo
on the Orient Express?
Could be! I think it's him though, the SCons will split from the UK party per his plan and he's the obvious man to poke at Swinney whilst he's there. Possible he'll be an interim to achieve the split and then hand on after 2026
Too many times the bridesmaid? Murdo has a very much over masticated piece of chewing gum vibe.
Not a MSP. And the seat Mr Ross may or may not vacate is a list one, so the next person on the list will get it automatically (mind, I didn't check who that is).
He is an MSP if you're referring to Murdo?
Sorry, yes, of course. Was thinking of another chap.
Indeed, and it’s wishful thinking that the LDs are going to suddenly morph into a centre-right orange booker party. They are liberal ‘progressive’ left and they’re not going to change overnight. Are there even any orange bookers left?
Yes, in some respects the LD manifesto is left of Starmer Labour, including a massive rise in council tax for second homes and restoration of student grants. Davey clearly trying to attract left liberals disillusioned by a centrist, authoritarian Labour Party as Kennedy did to Blair New Labour.
Clearly only Reform are a real alternative to the Tories on the right
Reform need to stop banging on about migration everybody knows where they stand, they need to put some focus on cost of living if they want to pick up extra votes.
Reform have proposed raising the IHT threshold to £2 million, clearly their focus is on anti immigration white working class Leavers and upper middle class Thatcherite rich southern rightwing home owners and their heirs
So who does that leave for the Conservatives ?
Based on the Tory manifesto, 30-40 year olds working in the private sector looking for their first home and private sector workers and the self employed who want to scrap NI.
Plus Jews still suspicious of Labour and British Hindus proud of Rishi as the first British Asian PM
Cant see them having much success with that, they didnt build many houses
I hope no one is following this deeply unserious account. Absolutely no way in hell that Corbyn gets only 0.44% in Islington North, even if you think Labour win it.
Reforming the taxation of international flights to focus on those who fly the most, while reducing costs for ordinary households who take one or two international return flights per year.
Giving local authorities, including National Park Authorities, the powers to end Right to Buy in their areas
Improving standards of animal health and welfare in agriculture, including a ban on caged hens.
Giving local environmental groups a place on water companies’ boards.
Creating a new Online Crime Agency to effectively tackle illegal content and activity online, such as personal fraud, revenge porn and threats and incitement to violence on social media.
Tackle child poverty by removing the two-child limit and the benefit cap.
Introducing a ‘Toddler Top-Up’: an enhanced rate of Child Benefit for one-year olds
Immediately requiring all new homes and non-domestic buildings to be built to a zero-carbon standard, including being fitted with solar panels, and progressively increasing standards as technology improves
Setting a 20% higher minimum wage for people on zero-hour contracts at times of normal demand to compensate them for the uncertainty of fluctuating hours of work
Encourage employers to promote employee ownership by giving staff in listed companies with more than 250 employees a right to request shares, to be held in trust for the benefit of employees
Taking initial unilateral steps to rebuild the relationship with the EU, starting by declaring a fundamental change in the UK’s approach and improving channels for foreign policy cooperation – seeking to join the Single Market
Requiring that all Ministers’ instant-messaging conversations involving government business must be placed on the departmental record. Ensuring that a record of all lobbying of Ministers via instant messages, emails, letters and phone calls is published as part of quarterly transparency releases
You get the feeling he was trying to bulk out the size of the list, adding these to the various ones he thought most bonkers.
Then again, isn't he the arsehole who had a go at Davey for missing a debate when his son's carer's plans fell through so Davey stayed with his disabled son that evening?
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
Just flicking through the Coal Authority's publications and frankly it looks like interesting and important work.
Disused colliery tip inspection is probably something we can all get behind, given prior disasters. Lots on metals pollution too.
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
Quangos have 700,000 employees so thats 1.2 million at a time when we are being told we have to import people to do the jobs. At a time when we have a deficit of £50 billion we should be taking any saving we can get. .
700,0000? Where does that number come from? I doubt it. There’s only 450,000 civil servants (FTE). You’d have to be bringing in something from local authorities but not sure what to get that high.
Sam Freedman @Samfrspare JLP show same movement to Reform as others. This is the first fully post D-Day poll and doesn't show too big a drop for the Tories (though is the methodology that helps them most and they're on 24%).
----------
The headline figures might look disappointing for Reform - but I think we are going to see crossover today/tomorrow from a polling company that has more favourable methodology to them / less favourable methodology to the Tories.
DYOR but I would lump on those trading bets right now if you can. Lib Dems over 40.5 seats still looks very good to me.
Tories still 9% ahead of Reform then even after D Day gate and the Farage multi party debate on Friday in that new JLP poll mainly taken over the weekend. No change in the Labour lead either.
Signs of relief at CCHQ and in No 10 I suspect even if Reform are up at Tory expense, the Greens up almost as much at Labour expense
A reminder that Chris Patten, as Tory Chairman, was MP in the Lib Dems' top target seat. He didn't do the chicken run - he set the right example in defeat, while masterminding Major's 1992 win.
From that to Dick Holden in 32 years.
Amusing that Patten's performance in Bath was worse than the Tories did nationally.
Patten is one of the architects of Brexit. Whenever it looked like the Tories might offer a referendum - on Maastricht etc - he was there to scupper the idea, thus stoking the fires of euroscepticism so much we actually voted to Leave completely, in the end. He is a fool. A clever, eloquent fool
Why do so many Brexit folk continue to blame pro-Europeans for their own folly? It's like they all know that the course the UK has taken since 2016 is a Suez style screw up, but those who opposed it are responsible. Brexit has crippled the Tories, maybe even killed them, but it is the populists that have to own it.
Blame belongs to those who lose, not those who win. Credit goes to those who win.
Hillary was to blame for losing to Trump, whom she should have beaten.
If Man Utd are defeated by Liverpool 7-0 then who shares the blame - the United Manager/Defence/Midfield etc or the Liverpool Manager/Midfield/Strikers etc?
If Liverpool win 7-0 they get the credit while the opposition gets the blame. Similarly with Brexit, blame lies solely on the Europhiles who held all the cards and lost, while credit goes to the Eurosceptics who won.
A reminder that Chris Patten, as Tory Chairman, was MP in the Lib Dems' top target seat. He didn't do the chicken run - he set the right example in defeat, while masterminding Major's 1992 win.
From that to Dick Holden in 32 years.
Amusing that Patten's performance in Bath was worse than the Tories did nationally.
Patten is one of the architects of Brexit. Whenever it looked like the Tories might offer a referendum - on Maastricht etc - he was there to scupper the idea, thus stoking the fires of euroscepticism so much we actually voted to Leave completely, in the end. He is a fool. A clever, eloquent fool
Why do so many Brexit folk continue to blame pro-Europeans for their own folly? It's like they all know that the course the UK has taken since 2016 is a Suez style screw up, but those who opposed it are responsible. Brexit has crippled the Tories, maybe even killed them, but it is the populists that have to own it.
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
Alabrooke obviously thinks such agencues as the Coal Authority are useless. Well, if you live in a mining area you know how important it is to have accessible records of old coal mines, before you plan anything ... when I sold a house as an executor, last time, the Coal Authority was a statutory check for the surveyor's report on the house.
Reform candidate said UK should have been neutral against Hitler
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjmmrwexv4ko A Reform UK candidate claimed the country would be "far better" if it had "taken Hitler up on his offer of neutrality" instead of fighting the Nazis in World War Two. Ian Gribbin, the party's candidate in Bexhill and Battle, also wrote online that women were the "sponging gender" and should be "deprived of health care". In posts from 2022 on the Unherd magazine website, seen by the BBC, he said Winston Churchill was "abysmal" and praised Russian President Vladimir Putin...
And Reform have backed him. They realise quite quickly they can't afford to disown hundreds of candidates with highly iffy views
Well they’d have to start at the very top. Although Farage disowns himself all the time especially when what he said yesterday is inconsistent with what he wants to say today.
The vast majority of Tory candidates have the decidedly iffy view that the country should go down the plughole and they should be elected to do nothing about it except seek personal enrichment from the process. That upsets me a good deal more than 'once liking some Tweets' or similar.
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
Just flicking through the Coal Authority's publications and frankly it looks like interesting and important work.
Disused colliery tip inspection is probably something we can all get behind, given prior disasters. Lots on metals pollution too.
A reminder that Chris Patten, as Tory Chairman, was MP in the Lib Dems' top target seat. He didn't do the chicken run - he set the right example in defeat, while masterminding Major's 1992 win.
From that to Dick Holden in 32 years.
Amusing that Patten's performance in Bath was worse than the Tories did nationally.
Patten is one of the architects of Brexit. Whenever it looked like the Tories might offer a referendum - on Maastricht etc - he was there to scupper the idea, thus stoking the fires of euroscepticism so much we actually voted to Leave completely, in the end. He is a fool. A clever, eloquent fool
Why do so many Brexit folk continue to blame pro-Europeans for their own folly? It's like they all know that the course the UK has taken since 2016 is a Suez style screw up, but those who opposed it are responsible. Brexit has crippled the Tories, maybe even killed them, but it is the populists that have to own it.
Blame belongs to those who lose, not those who win. Credit goes to those who win.
Hillary was to blame for losing to Trump, whom she should have beaten.
If Man Utd are defeated by Liverpool 7-0 then who shares the blame - the United Manager/Defence/Midfield etc or the Liverpool Manager/Midfield/Strikers etc?
If Liverpool win 7-0 they get the credit while the opposition gets the blame. Similarly with Brexit, blame lies solely on the Europhiles who held all the cards and lost, while credit goes to the Eurosceptics who won.
The difference is the eurosceptics won yet seem to be thoroughly unhappy.
Couple of interesting things in that JLP poll - Lab dropping to low 40s and combined Con/Ref vote at 38.
Clearly one poll and other surveys suggest otherwise but if you do get a Reform squeeze and a slight Lab/Ref overstatement you could see a narrower result than forecast at the moment (though still clear Labour win). Of course, there is no sign that any such squeeze is on right now.
Sam Freedman @Samfrspare JLP show same movement to Reform as others. This is the first fully post D-Day poll and doesn't show too big a drop for the Tories (though is the methodology that helps them most and they're on 24%).
----------
The headline figures might look disappointing for Reform - but I think we are going to see crossover today/tomorrow from a polling company that has more favourable methodology to them / less favourable methodology to the Tories.
DYOR but I would lump on those trading bets right now if you can. Lib Dems over 40.5 seats still looks very good to me.
Tories still 9% ahead of Reform then even after D Day gate and the Farage multi party debate on Friday in that new JLP poll mainly taken over the weekend. No change in the Labour lead either.
Signs of relief at CCHQ and in No 10 I suspect even if Reform are up at Tory expense, the Greens up almost as much at Labour expense
I suspect (but may be wrong) that at least some of the change is DK to Reform bringing Con and Lab down plus churn
This will surely be a sub-50-seat scenario if Tatton goes. It is one of the most Conservative places I can imagine.
Is Esther McVey just a bad campaigner? Going through her record, she performed slightly better than the national swing in Wirral West 2005, but underachieved the national swing in Wirral West 2010 and 2015 and Tatton in 2017 and 2019.
Wirral West 2005 - local swing 3.7% Lab to Con, national swing 3.1% Lab to Con Wirral West 2010 - local swing 4.4% Lab to Con, national swing 5.0% Lab to Con Wirral West 2015 - local swing 3.6% Con to Lab, national swing 0.5% Con to Lab Tatton 2017 - local swing 5.1% Con to Lab, national swing 2.0% Con to Lab Tatton 2019 - local swing 2.7% Lab to Con, national swing 4.5% Lab to Con
Fair enough, in 2017 McVey was losing any Osborne personal vote but in 2015 and 2019 she should have benefited from the usual boost that any sitting MP gets and she didn't seem to get that, in fact she seems to get an incumbency penalty.
A reminder that Chris Patten, as Tory Chairman, was MP in the Lib Dems' top target seat. He didn't do the chicken run - he set the right example in defeat, while masterminding Major's 1992 win.
From that to Dick Holden in 32 years.
Amusing that Patten's performance in Bath was worse than the Tories did nationally.
Patten is one of the architects of Brexit. Whenever it looked like the Tories might offer a referendum - on Maastricht etc - he was there to scupper the idea, thus stoking the fires of euroscepticism so much we actually voted to Leave completely, in the end. He is a fool. A clever, eloquent fool
Why do so many Brexit folk continue to blame pro-Europeans for their own folly? It's like they all know that the course the UK has taken since 2016 is a Suez style screw up, but those who opposed it are responsible. Brexit has crippled the Tories, maybe even killed them, but it is the populists that have to own it.
Blame belongs to those who lose, not those who win. Credit goes to those who win.
Hillary was to blame for losing to Trump, whom she should have beaten.
If Man Utd are defeated by Liverpool 7-0 then who shares the blame - the United Manager/Defence/Midfield etc or the Liverpool Manager/Midfield/Strikers etc?
If Liverpool win 7-0 they get the credit while the opposition gets the blame. Similarly with Brexit, blame lies solely on the Europhiles who held all the cards and lost, while credit goes to the Eurosceptics who won.
The difference is the eurosceptics won yet seem to be thoroughly unhappy.
The whole point of taking back control is that if we're unhappy with the government in office then we can kick the buggers out and get a change. That's going to happen in a few weeks.
With centralised EU dictats that we had no demos to change at elections, that was undemocratic and didn't happen.
So even if people are unhappy, we've still made progress.
Democracy is the worst available way to run a country, except for all others that have ever been tried.
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
Just flicking through the Coal Authority's publications and frankly it looks like interesting and important work.
Disused colliery tip inspection is probably something we can all get behind, given prior disasters. Lots on metals pollution too.
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
Just flicking through the Coal Authority's publications and frankly it looks like interesting and important work.
Disused colliery tip inspection is probably something we can all get behind, given prior disasters. Lots on metals pollution too.
In the US -- and some other nations -- the phrase "big tent" is more common than "broad church", when describing a party that accepts a broad range of views and candidates. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_tent
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
Alabrooke obviously thinks such agencues as the Coal Authority are useless. Well, if you live in a mining area you know how important it is to have accessible records of old coal mines, before you plan anything ... when I sold a house as an executor, last time, the Coal Authority was a statutory check for the surveyor's report on the house.
Actually I didnt suggest the coal authority I suggested the OBR. But since we're on it it a 50% reduction in the Scottish parliament costs looks good value too.
If you want spending cuts, start with the following
1) anything you do every damn day *is* part of your Core Fucking Business 2) its cheaper to insource the things you do every day 3) it’s cheaper to hire permanent staff to do them 4) to save money, you have to spend money 5) improving productivity is an incremental process
Sam Freedman @Samfrspare JLP show same movement to Reform as others. This is the first fully post D-Day poll and doesn't show too big a drop for the Tories (though is the methodology that helps them most and they're on 24%).
----------
The headline figures might look disappointing for Reform - but I think we are going to see crossover today/tomorrow from a polling company that has more favourable methodology to them / less favourable methodology to the Tories.
DYOR but I would lump on those trading bets right now if you can. Lib Dems over 40.5 seats still looks very good to me.
Tories still 9% ahead of Reform then even after D Day gate and the Farage multi party debate on Friday in that new JLP poll mainly taken over the weekend. No change in the Labour lead either.
Signs of relief at CCHQ and in No 10 I suspect even if Reform are up at Tory expense, the Greens up almost as much at Labour expense
Rounds up to 99% so I'm slightly suspicious.
Yes, some small relief for the Conservatives - they would still be on the wrong side of an historic defeat but they would likely remain the Official Opposition even with tactical voting.
This was however the same JL Partners who offered a 28% Conservative share just a couple of weeks ago so a four point drop in vote share doesn't suggest a campaign which has been wholly successful.
Let's see what Redfield & Wilton have to offer later this afternoon - will this be the normal 2,000 sample poll or will it be one of their larger "mega" polls with a sample of over 10,000?
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
I hated the Cheesecake Factory, so yeah Trump is probably catnip to Cheesecake Factory diners.
JohannesBorgen @jeuasommenulle In other words, I think Macron believes the main risk is for his “heir” not to be in the 2nd round in 2027 while he thinks he can still fairly easily win against Le Pen in the 2nd round. And guess what: LFI/Melenchon scored very bad yesterday. They’ve lost all their momentum.
A reminder that Chris Patten, as Tory Chairman, was MP in the Lib Dems' top target seat. He didn't do the chicken run - he set the right example in defeat, while masterminding Major's 1992 win.
From that to Dick Holden in 32 years.
Amusing that Patten's performance in Bath was worse than the Tories did nationally.
Patten is one of the architects of Brexit. Whenever it looked like the Tories might offer a referendum - on Maastricht etc - he was there to scupper the idea, thus stoking the fires of euroscepticism so much we actually voted to Leave completely, in the end. He is a fool. A clever, eloquent fool
Why do so many Brexit folk continue to blame pro-Europeans for their own folly? It's like they all know that the course the UK has taken since 2016 is a Suez style screw up, but those who opposed it are responsible. Brexit has crippled the Tories, maybe even killed them, but it is the populists that have to own it.
Blame belongs to those who lose, not those who win. Credit goes to those who win.
Hillary was to blame for losing to Trump, whom she should have beaten.
If Man Utd are defeated by Liverpool 7-0 then who shares the blame - the United Manager/Defence/Midfield etc or the Liverpool Manager/Midfield/Strikers etc?
If Liverpool win 7-0 they get the credit while the opposition gets the blame. Similarly with Brexit, blame lies solely on the Europhiles who held all the cards and lost, while credit goes to the Eurosceptics who won.
The difference is the eurosceptics won yet seem to be thoroughly unhappy.
The whole point of taking back control is that if we're unhappy with the government in office then we can kick the buggers out and get a change. That's going to happen in a few weeks.
With centralised EU dictats that we had no demos to change at elections, that was undemocratic and didn't happen.
So even if people are unhappy, we've still made progress.
Democracy is the worst available way to run a country, except for all others that have ever been tried.
Yes absolutely. This election is the proof that Brexit works and Brexit is worth it. We now get to throw out of power the wankers that ruled us. You can’t do that in the EU because so many rules are made in Brussels. You literally cannot do it
Of course we should go further and withdraw from the ECHR and any other organisation that seeks to govern us without democratic consent but Brexit was the first huge necessary step
Brexit is Brexit. The Tories are fucked because of Brexit. Because Brexit restored our democracy
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
I hated the Cheesecake Factory, so yeah Trump is probably catnip to Cheesecake Factory diners.
The only thing I know about the Cheesecake Factory is its where Penny (and for a while Bernadette) worked in the early seasons of The Big Bang Theory.
Sam Freedman @Samfrspare JLP show same movement to Reform as others. This is the first fully post D-Day poll and doesn't show too big a drop for the Tories (though is the methodology that helps them most and they're on 24%).
----------
The headline figures might look disappointing for Reform - but I think we are going to see crossover today/tomorrow from a polling company that has more favourable methodology to them / less favourable methodology to the Tories.
DYOR but I would lump on those trading bets right now if you can. Lib Dems over 40.5 seats still looks very good to me.
Tories still 9% ahead of Reform then even after D Day gate and the Farage multi party debate on Friday in that new JLP poll mainly taken over the weekend. No change in the Labour lead either.
Signs of relief at CCHQ and in No 10 I suspect even if Reform are up at Tory expense, the Greens up almost as much at Labour expense
I saw a clip of an interview with Andy Street and he was expecting the Reform share to decline after the spurt of Farage publicity. Seems reasonable as I'm not sure what he can do to maintain interest if there isn't a cross-over.
One of my abiding memories was during the 2005 campaign when there was speculation about the Tories imploding under Michael Howard, with the LibDems threatening to "decapitate" much of the Tory front-bench. Blair, apparently. expected another 100+ majority. That said, Rishi is in a much deeper hole than Howard ever was.
Couple of interesting things in that JLP poll - Lab dropping to low 40s and combined Con/Ref vote at 38.
Clearly one poll and other surveys suggest otherwise but if you do get a Reform squeeze and a slight Lab/Ref overstatement you could see a narrower result than forecast at the moment (though still clear Labour win). Of course, there is no sign that any such squeeze is on right now.
The final leaders debate is on BBC1 about a week before polling day in primetime at 9pm.
It is Starmer v Sunak only with Farage and other party leaders excluded. If Rishi knocked it out the park it could yet sway undecideds his way
If you want spending cuts, start with the following
1) anything you do every damn day *is* part of your Core Fucking Business 2) its cheaper to insource the things you do every day 3) it’s cheaper to hire permanent staff to do them 4) to save money, you have to spend money 5) improving productivity is an incremental process
Whilst that's all true, the killers are points 4 and 5. You have to spend money upfront to gradually save money in the future.
Few governments even think as far ahead as the next election. And the core vote for the current government give every impression of thinking that the country can fall apart in a decade's time, because they'll be six feet under by then. Just as long as they have a free TV licence in the meantime.
A metric to watch for Post DDay polls is best PM. With JL Partners this is unchanged really, a point better for Sunak. This is not necessarily a good thing for him (although it suggests meltdown less likely over it) as it indicates minds are just set now and a mid to high teens defeat may be unavoidable or at best mitigated to low teens
I hope no one is following this deeply unserious account. Absolutely no way in hell that Corbyn gets only 0.44% in Islington North, even if you think Labour win it.
Their model can't cope with out of the ordinary events. That's understandable, but the obvious thing to do is not to publicise your shit prediction!
Sam Freedman @Samfrspare JLP show same movement to Reform as others. This is the first fully post D-Day poll and doesn't show too big a drop for the Tories (though is the methodology that helps them most and they're on 24%).
----------
The headline figures might look disappointing for Reform - but I think we are going to see crossover today/tomorrow from a polling company that has more favourable methodology to them / less favourable methodology to the Tories.
DYOR but I would lump on those trading bets right now if you can. Lib Dems over 40.5 seats still looks very good to me.
I've been going on about betting on Labour getting just below 40%, and since then a lot of the polls have made that seem a distinct possibility.
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
I hated the Cheesecake Factory, so yeah Trump is probably catnip to Cheesecake Factory diners.
It attracts far more than MAGA faithful, that is why it is very smart line of attack. For Europeans, where mid-level restaurants are generally a lot better than US, it seems tacky and naff. But to Americans, those that can't afford high end fine dining, its what they go for "posh / special" and people with a bit of money, will get lunch or dinner there, as it is far better than most chain fast casual restaurants.
The next one he should go for is somewhere like Chipotle. Reduced portion sizes have been a big thing on social media in the US in regards to this chain.
Sam Freedman @Samfrspare JLP show same movement to Reform as others. This is the first fully post D-Day poll and doesn't show too big a drop for the Tories (though is the methodology that helps them most and they're on 24%).
----------
The headline figures might look disappointing for Reform - but I think we are going to see crossover today/tomorrow from a polling company that has more favourable methodology to them / less favourable methodology to the Tories.
DYOR but I would lump on those trading bets right now if you can. Lib Dems over 40.5 seats still looks very good to me.
Tories still 9% ahead of Reform then even after D Day gate and the Farage multi party debate on Friday in that new JLP poll mainly taken over the weekend. No change in the Labour lead either.
Signs of relief at CCHQ and in No 10 I suspect even if Reform are up at Tory expense, the Greens up almost as much at Labour expense
In my (very rudimentary) modelling, I find that Tory seats are around 3x more sensitive to a swing to Reform than Labour seats are to a swing to the Greens. The Green vote is piling up in the cities; the Reform vote in what might end up being marginals.
Otoh, I suspect very few people are changing which way they will vote at this stage , and therefore it's almost entirely a turnout game. In that sense, Reform polling doesn't matter except in a few Brexity seats on the east coast. It's only perhaps the Lib Dems who are gaining votes at the expense of other parties.
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
Alabrooke obviously thinks such agencues as the Coal Authority are useless. Well, if you live in a mining area you know how important it is to have accessible records of old coal mines, before you plan anything ... when I sold a house as an executor, last time, the Coal Authority was a statutory check for the surveyor's report on the house.
Actually I didnt suggest the coal authority I suggested the OBR. But since we're on it it a 50% reduction in the Scottish parliament costs looks good value too.
And what is the Monarchy if not an expensive quango?
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
I hated the Cheesecake Factory, so yeah Trump is probably catnip to Cheesecake Factory diners.
The only thing I know about the Cheesecake Factory is its where Penny (and for a while Bernadette) worked in the early seasons of The Big Bang Theory.
It's a similar fayre to the old shite you used to get at Frankie and Bennies, but with cheesecake themed deserts. It's a bit like Peter Kaye with garlic bread "garlic and bread? dirty b@5tards!" Cheese and cake? Dirty bas****!
Sam Freedman @Samfrspare JLP show same movement to Reform as others. This is the first fully post D-Day poll and doesn't show too big a drop for the Tories (though is the methodology that helps them most and they're on 24%).
----------
The headline figures might look disappointing for Reform - but I think we are going to see crossover today/tomorrow from a polling company that has more favourable methodology to them / less favourable methodology to the Tories.
DYOR but I would lump on those trading bets right now if you can. Lib Dems over 40.5 seats still looks very good to me.
I've been going on about betting on Labour getting just below 40%, and since then a lot of the polls have made that seem a distinct possibility.
The polls of course tended to overstate Labour in 1997, 2001 and 2005. It is tricky to say if that effect is being reproduced now, or if methodologies now have managed to avoid this.
This will surely be a sub-50-seat scenario if Tatton goes. It is one of the most Conservative places I can imagine.
Is Esther McVey just a bad campaigner? Going through her record, she performed slightly better than the national swing in Wirral West 2005, but underachieved the national swing in Wirral West 2010 and 2015 and Tatton in 2017 and 2019.
Wirral West 2005 - local swing 3.7% Lab to Con, national swing 3.1% Lab to Con Wirral West 2010 - local swing 4.4% Lab to Con, national swing 5.0% Lab to Con Wirral West 2015 - local swing 3.6% Con to Lab, national swing 0.5% Con to Lab Tatton 2017 - local swing 5.1% Con to Lab, national swing 2.0% Con to Lab Tatton 2019 - local swing 2.7% Lab to Con, national swing 4.5% Lab to Con
Fair enough, in 2017 McVey was losing any Osborne personal vote but in 2015 and 2019 she should have benefited from the usual boost that any sitting MP gets and she didn't seem to get that, in fact she seems to get an incumbency penalty.
If things go as currently anticipated it will be interesting to see how this affects the stability of all political parties going forward. The Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having someone clearly unsuited to the role in the position of leader. Up to now, even if this was not optimal, one would expect swing back and old time loyalties to reduce that cost to tolerable levels. In the more febrile present it appears that that is not the case.
I think this will make MPs, and not just Tory MPs, much more anxious about their leadership in future. If Starmer is not cutting the mustard in 2-3 years time there will be 200-300 Labour MPs worried about their future. The consequences of the complacency and arrogance of this episode will burn deep in their souls.
Technically I think the Tories are about to pay a terrible price for having three people unsuited to the role as leader, one after another.
The leaders dont help, but lack of policies is the bigger problem.
"Cutting quangos" isn't a policy; it's a slogan. Like the earlier 'bonfire of the quangos', it's meaningless in financial or policy terms.
Eg, would you scrap the rest of HS2 ? Cut your 4% from NHS England ?
Or a you just talking about a few million pounds from scrapping some of the obscure ones few would miss ?
Yes, you routinely come up with this drivel by chosing the most contoversial things to cut. Quangos are off balance sheet government. They employ something like 700,000 people and cost anywhere from £40 -80 billion depending on whose numbers you chose to believe. There are over 750 of them.
You say you couldnt find savings in that. You shouldnt be put in charge of a budget. Like any cost savings you start with a target, protect the essentials and eliminate nice to dos and not needed. Then you end up with a potential list.
Ive already said as an example I'd close the OBR we lived without it prior to Osborne. Merge its with the BoE or the Treasury for forecasts and take the headcount savings. Then look at the other 750. It may well be you find more savings than you wanted, so park a budget and put some money back where it’s needed. I'd go for infrastructure.
Quangos are not (usually) off balance sheet. And they usually have a statutory purpose. Taking the OBR as an example, before there was an OBR there was a forecasting team in HMT: pretty much exactly the same team operating from the same desks.
Of course but you can repeal laws. The treasury still does forecasts so now we're paying twice over for the same service and in the OBRs case they admit their forecasts are consistently out and not timely. Would you spend £5 million on that or spend it on something more useful ?
No, Treasury uses the OBR numbers.
On laws. Yes, you can start to deregulate but your getting into something far more complex than just “cutting quangos”:
As noted above, many regulators charge their industry for the service and much if the other stuff is political third rail stuff: good luck cutting the Coal Authority or Historic England for example. We don’t really need either, but they don’t cost much and those who love them really love them.
You seem to be saying nobody can take difficult decisions
No, I’m saying they take different ones, routinely. In the case of the public sector the decision has routinely been made to depress salaries to retain staff numbers. I’d increase salaries and reduce staff, and do that fairly evenly in most areas but in an accelerated manner where, for example, AI can help boost productivity.
In the Whitehall centre the standard staff turnover in post is about 20%, so you don’t even need redundancies if you reshape the teams. The problem with most recruitment freezes is that no one plans for it, and all the holes randomly appear where all your best people (usually the first to move on) happen to leave. What’s needed is proper org redesign (and no, I don’t mean you hire McKinsey, it can be done internally).
I agree with that but as in other costs cutting efforts sometimes you can just get rid of a whole department and integrate it elsewhere in the business. It's like the examples you cite who needs the coal authority ? The country will go on without it. A "difficult decision" but it needs to be made.
But I bet it’s three people in an office. Not worth the political argument. I don’t disagree with a lot of rationalisation though. What you have to bear in mind though it that there are only 450,000 civil servants. For the purposes of this discussion (FCA etc.) let’s call it half a million. Average wage is probably 40K, which gets us to 20Bn. Add on 50% for NI, rents, teasing etc and you get to 30Bn.
That will be a massive over-estimate, and even then a massive 20% reduction gets you 6Bn, which is well under 1% of annual government spend.
Alabrooke obviously thinks such agencues as the Coal Authority are useless. Well, if you live in a mining area you know how important it is to have accessible records of old coal mines, before you plan anything ... when I sold a house as an executor, last time, the Coal Authority was a statutory check for the surveyor's report on the house.
Actually I didnt suggest the coal authority I suggested the OBR. But since we're on it it a 50% reduction in the Scottish parliament costs looks good value too.
And what is the Monarchy if not an expensive quango?
A symbol for the nation that avoids a politician head of state with much less power in reality than most unelected quangos
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
I hated the Cheesecake Factory, so yeah Trump is probably catnip to Cheesecake Factory diners.
The only thing I know about the Cheesecake Factory is its where Penny (and for a while Bernadette) worked in the early seasons of The Big Bang Theory.
It's a similar fayre to the old shite you used to get at Frankie and Bennies, but with cheesecake themed deserts. It's a bit like Peter Kaye with garlic bread "garlic and bread? dirty b@5tards!" Cheese and cake? Dirty bas****!
Actually that's not true. Frankie and Bennies is loads of frozen / reheated / pre-prepared food. One of the USPs for Cheesecake Factory is every is made on site and to order. Its certainly not of the standard that mid-level restaurants in the UK could get away with, but the US it fits a niche between fast food / fast casual (that people every day) and the "real" restaurants that are either out of a lot of people price range or simply don't exist in many towns in the US.
Sam Freedman @Samfrspare JLP show same movement to Reform as others. This is the first fully post D-Day poll and doesn't show too big a drop for the Tories (though is the methodology that helps them most and they're on 24%).
----------
The headline figures might look disappointing for Reform - but I think we are going to see crossover today/tomorrow from a polling company that has more favourable methodology to them / less favourable methodology to the Tories.
DYOR but I would lump on those trading bets right now if you can. Lib Dems over 40.5 seats still looks very good to me.
I've been going on about betting on Labour getting just below 40%, and since then a lot of the polls have made that seem a distinct possibility.
Yes, 41% is now closer to Corbyn 2017 than Blair 1997 for Starmer Labour
The Martin Bell scenario was unique, and all the other parties stood aside for him. I agree that remain may have an attritional effect, but my question is perhaps better phrased as: if the Tories aren't winning Tatton, what are they actually for?
This will surely be a sub-50-seat scenario if Tatton goes. It is one of the most Conservative places I can imagine.
Is Esther McVey just a bad campaigner? Going through her record, she performed slightly better than the national swing in Wirral West 2005, but underachieved the national swing in Wirral West 2010 and 2015 and Tatton in 2017 and 2019.
Wirral West 2005 - local swing 3.7% Lab to Con, national swing 3.1% Lab to Con Wirral West 2010 - local swing 4.4% Lab to Con, national swing 5.0% Lab to Con Wirral West 2015 - local swing 3.6% Con to Lab, national swing 0.5% Con to Lab Tatton 2017 - local swing 5.1% Con to Lab, national swing 2.0% Con to Lab Tatton 2019 - local swing 2.7% Lab to Con, national swing 4.5% Lab to Con
Fair enough, in 2017 McVey was losing any Osborne personal vote but in 2015 and 2019 she should have benefited from the usual boost that any sitting MP gets and she didn't seem to get that, in fact she seems to get an incumbency penalty.
It would be shocking for Tatton to go red. Bell won back in the day because Neil Hamilton was, well, Neil Hamilton, and the other parties didn’t stand candidates. For the Conservatives to lose Tatton in a more conventional election is existential.
Tatler published an article recently on Cheshire and it was mostly on bits of Cheshire within the Tatton constituency (with a bit about Chester because of the Duke of Westminster’s wedding).
Mind I was over Wilmslow way on Saturday and didn’t see too many Tory banners (amusingly there is a huge Labour one on the way into Prestbury - but that is a different story and seat). So who can say.
As a well travelled for flint knappers weekly, are you seriously saying you have never seen or been to a cheesecake factory in the US? You can't miss the gaudy buildings that are housed in. They are everywhere in the US.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
I assume it is yet another soulless American 'restaurant' chain found on roundabouts. The sad thing is there are some superb, innovative restaurants in the States but they are swamped by TGI Fridays replicas.
This will surely be a sub-50-seat scenario if Tatton goes. It is one of the most Conservative places I can imagine.
Is Esther McVey just a bad campaigner? Going through her record, she performed slightly better than the national swing in Wirral West 2005, but underachieved the national swing in Wirral West 2010 and 2015 and Tatton in 2017 and 2019.
Wirral West 2005 - local swing 3.7% Lab to Con, national swing 3.1% Lab to Con Wirral West 2010 - local swing 4.4% Lab to Con, national swing 5.0% Lab to Con Wirral West 2015 - local swing 3.6% Con to Lab, national swing 0.5% Con to Lab Tatton 2017 - local swing 5.1% Con to Lab, national swing 2.0% Con to Lab Tatton 2019 - local swing 2.7% Lab to Con, national swing 4.5% Lab to Con
Fair enough, in 2017 McVey was losing any Osborne personal vote but in 2015 and 2019 she should have benefited from the usual boost that any sitting MP gets and she didn't seem to get that, in fact she seems to get an incumbency penalty.
Remainer seat effect, maybe?
I don't think Tatton was Remain?
In Esther's defence, national swing is the wrong comparator. I think Merseyside has been swinging relatively to Lab for some time. It would be relevant to compare Wirral West to Wirral South, and perhaps to Wallasey and Crosby and its successors; and Tatton to Macclesfield.
I doubt the Liberal Democrats will be that bothered by a negative review from Guido. It'd be like Reform UK pinning their hopes on a glowing editorial by the Canary.
Obviously, but my point was the policies are much further to the left than the Lib Dems of 10 years ago, where they were making the pitch for combination of centre and centre left, with Orange Bookers being in charge.
The Martin Bell scenario was unique, and all the other parties stood aside for him. I agree that remain may have an attritional effect, but my question is perhaps better phrased as: if the Tories aren't winning Tatton, what are they actually for?
Rural and market town and commuter belt Leave seats
Tatton, Altrincham and Sale W and Macclesfield are neighbouring seats anyone of sane mind would for years have considered safe Tory seats for all time but demographic change and the surge in very affluent remainerish Manchester based professionals taking firmly against the Tories in the past few years and notably post Partygate and the Truss disaster, in my view makes fertile ground for Labour, alongside the likes of Cheadle and Hazel Grove which are also in the same environs and will without a shadow of doubt go Lib Dem for same reasons.
As a Manchester professional and north Manchester resident i talk about the 'Chorltonifcation' of the Greater Manchester hinterland as a vast swathe from Ramsbottom in the north to Knutsford in the south comes to resemble hipsterish Chorlton cum Hardy in south Manchester. Its all becoming quite uniform now with hipster beards and artisan bakeries everywhere you turn... which isn't good for Tories even before the present catastrophes began to unfold.
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
I hated the Cheesecake Factory, so yeah Trump is probably catnip to Cheesecake Factory diners.
The only thing I know about the Cheesecake Factory is its where Penny (and for a while Bernadette) worked in the early seasons of The Big Bang Theory.
It's a similar fayre to the old shite you used to get at Frankie and Bennies, but with cheesecake themed deserts. It's a bit like Peter Kaye with garlic bread "garlic and bread? dirty b@5tards!" Cheese and cake? Dirty bas****!
Actually that's not true. Frankie and Bennies is loads of frozen / reheated / pre-prepared food. One of the USPs for Cheesecake Factory is every is made on site and to order. Its certainly not of the standard that mid-level restaurants in the UK could get away with, but the US it fits a niche between fast food / fast casual (that people every day) and the "real" restaurants that are either out of a lot of people price range or simply don't exist in many towns in the US.
I speak from experience. To my mind it was not "mom and pop" fayre, it was still very much from "the man".
I doubt the Liberal Democrats will be that bothered by a negative review from Guido. It'd be like Reform UK pinning their hopes on a glowing editorial by the Canary.
Obviously, but my point was the policies are much further to the left than the Lib Dems of 10 years ago, where they were making the pitch for combination of centre and centre left, with Orange Bookers being in charge.
Sir Ed is an Orange Booker!
He has had the sort of conversion Starmer has that (but opposite direction) as that manifesto certainly isn't.
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
I hated the Cheesecake Factory, so yeah Trump is probably catnip to Cheesecake Factory diners.
The only thing I know about the Cheesecake Factory is its where Penny (and for a while Bernadette) worked in the early seasons of The Big Bang Theory.
It's a similar fayre to the old shite you used to get at Frankie and Bennies, but with cheesecake themed deserts. It's a bit like Peter Kaye with garlic bread "garlic and bread? dirty b@5tards!" Cheese and cake? Dirty bas****!
Actually that's not true. Frankie and Bennies is loads of frozen / reheated / pre-prepared food. One of the USPs for Cheesecake Factory is every is made on site and to order. Its certainly not of the standard that mid-level restaurants in the UK could get away with, but the US it fits a niche between fast food / fast casual (that people every day) and the "real" restaurants that are either out of a lot of people price range or simply don't exist in many towns in the US.
I speak from experience. To my mind it was not "mom and pop" fayre, it was still very much from "the man".
Oh god, in terms of actual quality, it absolutely is, its fake "posh" food but it isn't frozen / microwave blast cuisine. That is places like Olive Garden or Applebee's. Frankie and Bernie = Applebee's in the US.
But remember even in the UK these days we have a much higher quality when you start to spend £30 a dish.
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
Never heard of it.
Not just heard of it but been to it in Florida. Was pretty good, the deserts particularly.
The Martin Bell scenario was unique, and all the other parties stood aside for him. I agree that remain may have an attritional effect, but my question is perhaps better phrased as: if the Tories aren't winning Tatton, what are they actually for?
Yeah he benefitted from the 35% odd Lab/LD vote from 1992 not standing. Hamilton just about performed in line with the decline in safe seats in 97, he'd have possibly lost in a normal fight to Labour in a hyper marginal finish (extra 4% swing on top of UNS)
As a well travelled for flint knappers weekly, are you seriously saying you have never seen or been to a cheesecake factory in the US? You can't miss the gaudy buildings that are housed in. They are everywhere in the US.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
I have honestly missed it. And I travel in America a lot
These words must have different connotations in the USA. Honestly America is sometimes so foreign
Last time I was there I did note there was some new (to me) nationwide chain which actually did decent and not disgustingly large oversweet sandwiches. A bit like an American Pret. I forget the name but it was ok!
I’m back in September and I will try and seek out…. The cheesecake factory
As a well travelled for flint knappers weekly, are you seriously saying you have never seen or been to a cheesecake factory in the US? You can't miss the gaudy buildings that are housed in. They are everywhere in the US.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
I have honestly missed it. And I travel in America a lot
These words must have different connotations in the USA. Honestly America is sometimes so foreign
Last time I was there I did note there was some new (to me) nationwide chain which actually did decent and not disgustingly large oversweet sandwiches. A bit like an American Pret. I forget the name but it was ok!
I’m back in September and I will try and seek out…. The cheesecake factory
As somebody who is well travelled and versed in high quality food, I am not sure you will enjoy the experience !!!
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
Never heard of it.
Why would you have heard of a restaurant chain in the US. Do you think people in Ohio have heard of Leon (not that one, that one).
As a well travelled for flint knappers weekly, are you seriously saying you have never seen or been to a cheesecake factory in the US? You can't miss the gaudy buildings that are housed in. They are everywhere in the US.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
I have honestly missed it. And I travel in America a lot
These words must have different connotations in the USA. Honestly America is sometimes so foreign
Last time I was there I did note there was some new (to me) nationwide chain which actually did decent and not disgustingly large oversweet sandwiches. A bit like an American Pret. I forget the name but it was ok!
I’m back in September and I will try and seek out…. The cheesecake factory
As somebody who is well travelled and versed in high quality food, I am not sure you will enjoy the experience !!!
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
Never heard of it.
Not just heard of it but been to it in Florida. Was pretty good, the deserts particularly.
As a well travelled for flint knappers weekly, are you seriously saying you have never seen or been to a cheesecake factory in the US? You can't miss the gaudy buildings that are housed in. They are everywhere in the US.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
I have honestly missed it. And I travel in America a lot
These words must have different connotations in the USA. Honestly America is sometimes so foreign
Last time I was there I did note there was some new (to me) nationwide chain which actually did decent and not disgustingly large oversweet sandwiches. A bit like an American Pret. I forget the name but it was ok!
I’m back in September and I will try and seek out…. The cheesecake factory
As somebody who is well travelled and versed in high quality food, I am not sure you will enjoy the experience !!!
It's Industrially manufactured edible products masquerading as food. You've got to have a death wish if you put that shite in your mouth.
The Martin Bell scenario was unique, and all the other parties stood aside for him. I agree that remain may have an attritional effect, but my question is perhaps better phrased as: if the Tories aren't winning Tatton, what are they actually for?
Yeah he benefitted from the 35% odd Lab/LD vote from 1992 not standing. Hamilton just about performed in line with the decline in safe seats in 97, he'd have possibly lost in a normal fight to Labour in a hyper marginal finish (extra 4% swing on top of UNS)
Bet365 has odds up for (I think) all UK constituencies; Tatton has Labour at 4/7, Tories at 5/4. I do wonder whether their odds in general are overstating the likelihood of Tory catastrophe.
As a well travelled for flint knappers weekly, are you seriously saying you have never seen or been to a cheesecake factory in the US? You can't miss the gaudy buildings that are housed in. They are everywhere in the US.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
I have honestly missed it. And I travel in America a lot
These words must have different connotations in the USA. Honestly America is sometimes so foreign
Last time I was there I did note there was some new (to me) nationwide chain which actually did decent and not disgustingly large oversweet sandwiches. A bit like an American Pret. I forget the name but it was ok!
I’m back in September and I will try and seek out…. The cheesecake factory
As somebody who is well travelled and versed in high quality food, I am not sure you will enjoy the experience !!!
It's Industrially manufactured edible products masquerading as food. You've got to have a death wish if you put that shite in your mouth.
It is a good reminder just how much better British food scene has got over the past 20-30 years. That standard of food is just not acceptable when you start to spend a mid-level amount of money. That is why the restaurants who try to become a chain too quickly and standards drop go busto.
Even low end, those brands like Frankie & Bennies on the lower end are in constant struggle because the offering is piss poor. How many "posh" burger places have gone under because people expect more in the UK now.
If you want spending cuts, start with the following
1) anything you do every damn day *is* part of your Core Fucking Business 2) its cheaper to insource the things you do every day 3) it’s cheaper to hire permanent staff to do them 4) to save money, you have to spend money 5) improving productivity is an incremental process
Whilst that's all true, the killers are points 4 and 5. You have to spend money upfront to gradually save money in the future.
Few governments even think as far ahead as the next election. And the core vote for the current government give every impression of thinking that the country can fall apart in a decade's time, because they'll be six feet under by then. Just as long as they have a free TV licence in the meantime.
It’s an old problem. The classic story was a steel plant when nationalised.
The issue - “The old plant is expensive and in the wrong place. We need to build a new plant at a different place on the coast”
The government - “Are you fucking insane? You are going to knock down a steel plant in a government constituency. And build a new one in an opposition constituency. That will employ less people. This will cost many millions and will only yield results after the election. Go away and never come back.”
Ok, I've compiled 25 questions for the General Election Competition. Thanks to everyone who's made suggestions. A reminder that I've dropped all non-numerical questions, so if someone wants to run something parallel asking questions like "in which seat will..." then be my guest.
Also, I've devised a fiendish scoring system to make sure all questions count equally. That is, on difficult questions like "how many seats will Labour win?" just as many points will be given out as easier questions like "how many seats will the DUP get?" Obviously it's easier to hit the exact right number with the DUP one than the Labour one, but my scoring system flattens that out.
In essence the most important thing is that you give better answers than other people. Being 1 off the Labour seats will probably earn you big points, but being 1 off with DUP seats might well get you nothing at all.
More details on the scoring will follow later, but for now... the questions!
General Election Competition
In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 5. Reform lose their deposit? 6. Labour lose their deposit?
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)?
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate?
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 14. Seats will Labour win? 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 16. Seats will the SNP win? 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 18. Seats will DUP win? 19. Seats will Reform come second in?
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 25. Will Speaker get?
Rules: "Independent" means the candidate has no party affiliation or where the party is standing in a single seat. Candidates nominated for a party who are suspended by their party after nominations close still count for the party. "Green" treats the Green Parties in England & Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland as a single party. All entries must be made before midday on polling day, 4th July
Please tag @Farooq in your answers so I'm less likely to miss them.
@Farooq for some of these (like margin) you need to specify units
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
I hated the Cheesecake Factory, so yeah Trump is probably catnip to Cheesecake Factory diners.
The only thing I know about the Cheesecake Factory is its where Penny (and for a while Bernadette) worked in the early seasons of The Big Bang Theory.
It's a similar fayre to the old shite you used to get at Frankie and Bennies, but with cheesecake themed deserts. It's a bit like Peter Kaye with garlic bread "garlic and bread? dirty b@5tards!" Cheese and cake? Dirty bas****!
Actually that's not true. Frankie and Bennies is loads of frozen / reheated / pre-prepared food. One of the USPs for Cheesecake Factory is every is made on site and to order. Its certainly not of the standard that mid-level restaurants in the UK could get away with, but the US it fits a niche between fast food / fast casual (that people every day) and the "real" restaurants that are either out of a lot of people price range or simply don't exist in many towns in the US.
I speak from experience. To my mind it was not "mom and pop" fayre, it was still very much from "the man".
Oh god, in terms of actual quality, it absolutely is, its fake "posh" food but it isn't frozen / microwave blast cuisine. That is places like Olive Garden or Applebee's. Frankie and Bernie = Applebee's in the US.
But remember even in the UK these days we have a much higher quality when you start to spend £30 a dish.
I'm currently in Gozo. Dined at a Michelin starred place in the harbour area called T'mun last night, E25 for a main and it was sublime. Way ahead of anything you'd get for £25 in the UK or 50 bucks from a chain in the US.
The Martin Bell scenario was unique, and all the other parties stood aside for him. I agree that remain may have an attritional effect, but my question is perhaps better phrased as: if the Tories aren't winning Tatton, what are they actually for?
Yeah he benefitted from the 35% odd Lab/LD vote from 1992 not standing. Hamilton just about performed in line with the decline in safe seats in 97, he'd have possibly lost in a normal fight to Labour in a hyper marginal finish (extra 4% swing on top of UNS)
Bet365 has odds up for (I think) all UK constituencies; Tatton has Labour at 4/7, Tories at 5/4. I do wonder whether their odds in general are overstating the likelihood of Tory catastrophe.
Wow, even been brave enough to put up Ashfield now.
Labour 8/15 Reform UK 13/5 Ashfield Independents 19/4 Conservatives 33/1 Lib Dems 250/1 Green 250/1
Has any party been at longer odds than 33/1 for a seat they currently hold?
As a well travelled for flint knappers weekly, are you seriously saying you have never seen or been to a cheesecake factory in the US? You can't miss the gaudy buildings that are housed in. They are everywhere in the US.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
I have honestly missed it. And I travel in America a lot
These words must have different connotations in the USA. Honestly America is sometimes so foreign
Last time I was there I did note there was some new (to me) nationwide chain which actually did decent and not disgustingly large oversweet sandwiches. A bit like an American Pret. I forget the name but it was ok!
I’m back in September and I will try and seek out…. The cheesecake factory
As somebody who is well travelled and versed in high quality food, I am not sure you will enjoy the experience !!!
The whole idea of a chain restaurant is anathema to Europeans. But it’s not logical. It makes total sense in terms of capitalism - if you can produce ten great dishes reliably in an enjoyable environment why not franchise out that mix to multiple locations? It’s weird that some places in the uk are chains but somehow get away with it and are deemed acceptable by the bourgeois - pizza express, Pret A Manger. Maybe Nando’s at a pinch?
Americans are also risk averse when it comes to cuisine. So a chain tells you that you can predict what you’re going to get, which is nice for many people
Btw the food in Ukraine has been really good so far. Same in Moldova. Think they are so poor they have to use fresh local ingredients. Not much processed stuff. It shows
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
I hated the Cheesecake Factory, so yeah Trump is probably catnip to Cheesecake Factory diners.
The only thing I know about the Cheesecake Factory is its where Penny (and for a while Bernadette) worked in the early seasons of The Big Bang Theory.
It's a similar fayre to the old shite you used to get at Frankie and Bennies, but with cheesecake themed deserts. It's a bit like Peter Kaye with garlic bread "garlic and bread? dirty b@5tards!" Cheese and cake? Dirty bas****!
Actually that's not true. Frankie and Bennies is loads of frozen / reheated / pre-prepared food. One of the USPs for Cheesecake Factory is every is made on site and to order. Its certainly not of the standard that mid-level restaurants in the UK could get away with, but the US it fits a niche between fast food / fast casual (that people every day) and the "real" restaurants that are either out of a lot of people price range or simply don't exist in many towns in the US.
I speak from experience. To my mind it was not "mom and pop" fayre, it was still very much from "the man".
Oh god, in terms of actual quality, it absolutely is, its fake "posh" food but it isn't frozen / microwave blast cuisine. That is places like Olive Garden or Applebee's. Frankie and Bernie = Applebee's in the US.
But remember even in the UK these days we have a much higher quality when you start to spend £30 a dish.
I'm currently in Gozo. Dined at a Michelin starred place in the harbour area called T'mun last night, E25 for a main and it was sublime. Way ahead of anything you'd get for £25 in the UK or 50 bucks from a chain in the US.
Of course there are many places you can eat in Europe, particularly places like Spain and Italy, better for less. But the UK is much better across the board than it was in the 80s and 90s. I am not sure that's true in the US, fast food is now really terrible (not only terrible for you, but looks and taste foul, and relatively very expensive), and mid isn't much better.
We talked the other day on here why small towns in France can still have high streets that work, where as the UK, its only coffee shops, bars and chain restaurants these days. Wages, rents, rates, etc.
As a well travelled for flint knappers weekly, are you seriously saying you have never seen or been to a cheesecake factory in the US? You can't miss the gaudy buildings that are housed in. They are everywhere in the US.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
Although Trump Tower is famous for the quality of its mushrooms.
Indeed I’ll develop that argument. One of the great problems with American food is not the cooking or the restaurants - the chains and the recipes - it’s the corruption of the basic ingredients. Fructose and hormones. Shit at the source
As a well travelled for flint knappers weekly, are you seriously saying you have never seen or been to a cheesecake factory in the US? You can't miss the gaudy buildings that are housed in. They are everywhere in the US.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
I have honestly missed it. And I travel in America a lot
These words must have different connotations in the USA. Honestly America is sometimes so foreign
Last time I was there I did note there was some new (to me) nationwide chain which actually did decent and not disgustingly large oversweet sandwiches. A bit like an American Pret. I forget the name but it was ok!
I’m back in September and I will try and seek out…. The cheesecake factory
As somebody who is well travelled and versed in high quality food, I am not sure you will enjoy the experience !!!
Tatton, Altrincham and Sale W and Macclesfield are neighbouring seats anyone of sane mind would for years have considered safe Tory seats for all time but demographic change and the surge in very affluent remainerish Manchester based professionals taking firmly against the Tories in the past few years and notably post Partygate and the Truss disaster, in my view makes fertile ground for Labour, alongside the likes of Cheadle and Hazel Grove which are also in the same environs and will without a shadow of doubt go Lib Dem for same reasons.
As a Manchester professional and north Manchester resident i talk about the 'Chorltonifcation' of the Greater Manchester hinterland as a vast swathe from Ramsbottom in the north to Knutsford in the south comes to resemble hipsterish Chorlton cum Hardy in south Manchester. Its all becoming quite uniform now with hipster beards and artisan bakeries everywhere you turn... which isn't good for Tories even before the present catastrophes began to unfold.
Tatton, Altrincham and Sale W and Macclesfield are neighbouring seats anyone of sane mind would for years have considered safe Tory seats for all time but demographic change and the surge in very affluent remainerish Manchester based professionals taking firmly against the Tories in the past few years and notably post Partygate and the Truss disaster, in my view makes fertile ground for Labour, alongside the likes of Cheadle and Hazel Grove which are also in the same environs and will without a shadow of doubt go Lib Dem for same reasons.
As a Manchester professional and north Manchester resident i talk about the 'Chorltonifcation' of the Greater Manchester hinterland as a vast swathe from Ramsbottom in the north to Knutsford in the south comes to resemble hipsterish Chorlton cum Hardy in south Manchester. Its all becoming quite uniform now with hipster beards and artisan bakeries everywhere you turn... which isn't good for Tories even before the present catastrophes began to unfold.
General Election Competition In how many seats will: 1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 152 2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 110 3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 0 4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 2 5. Reform lose their deposit? 18 6. Labour lose their deposit? 0
How big: 7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 41,501 8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)? 21,001
How small: 9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 48 10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 700 11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate? 56
How many: 12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? Grouping true indies as one... 12 13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 143 14. Seats will Labour win? 415 15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 41 16. Seats will the SNP win? 23 17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 7 18. Seats will DUP win? 8 19. Seats will Reform come second in? 89
What percentage vote: 20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 27% 21. Will Reform get across the UK? 14% 22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 36% 23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 19% 24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 37% 25. Will Speaker get? 65%
Indeed I’ll develop that argument. One of the great problems with American food is not the cooking or the restaurants - the chains and the recipes - it’s the corruption of the basic ingredients. Fructose and hormones. Shit at the source
There is also the corporate push for deskilled kitchens. It far cheaper to create recipes that require little to no equipment beyond a microwave or ones of those special ovens that cooks /steams in rapid time, and in doing so doesn't require actual trained chefs. A good example, Krispy Kreme started with their USP that their doughnuts were made in shop, fresh from scratch every day. Now everything is made in a factory and all they do is heat up the doughnuts and mix water with pre-packaged dry frosting and slop that ontop.
Its like the school dinners here, but in the US you are now paying $20-30-40 (+20% tip) for it.
As a well travelled for flint knappers weekly, are you seriously saying you have never seen or been to a cheesecake factory in the US? You can't miss the gaudy buildings that are housed in. They are everywhere in the US.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
I have honestly missed it. And I travel in America a lot
These words must have different connotations in the USA. Honestly America is sometimes so foreign
Last time I was there I did note there was some new (to me) nationwide chain which actually did decent and not disgustingly large oversweet sandwiches. A bit like an American Pret. I forget the name but it was ok!
I’m back in September and I will try and seek out…. The cheesecake factory
As somebody who is well travelled and versed in high quality food, I am not sure you will enjoy the experience !!!
The whole idea of a chain restaurant is anathema to Europeans. But it’s not logical. It makes total sense in terms of capitalism - if you can produce ten great dishes reliably in an enjoyable environment why not franchise out that mix to multiple locations? It’s weird that some places in the uk are chains but somehow get away with it and are deemed acceptable by the bourgeois - pizza express, Pret A Manger. Maybe Nando’s at a pinch?
Americans are also risk averse when it comes to cuisine. So a chain tells you that you can predict what you’re going to get, which is nice for many people
Btw the food in Ukraine has been really good so far. Same in Moldova. Think they are so poor they have to use fresh local ingredients. Not much processed stuff. It shows
Wagamama, Pho, maybe Turtle Bay are chain restaurants that are actually edible, and appear to have actual whole foods in them. I can't ever imagine eating the shite in the Cheesecake Factory.
Indeed I’ll develop that argument. One of the great problems with American food is not the cooking or the restaurants - the chains and the recipes - it’s the corruption of the basic ingredients. Fructose and hormones. Shit at the source
Wetherspoons is cheap but you get the impression the ingredients are fairly good quality.
Comments
“EXCLUSIVEHow Sweden became a 'haven' for mafia gangs and the EU's gun crime capital off the back of surging migration: As murders surge, police and politicians say the nation is at crisis point”
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13501783/How-Sweden-haven-mafia-gangs.html
After 14 years of cutting into the bone, there won't be many that haven't had to make multiple very solid cases for their continued existence at this point. By far the great bulk of public spending is departmental.
NEW:
@RestisPolitics
/ JLP poll, 7th-9th June
*Labour lead at 17 points*
Change on last week in brackets
LAB: 41% (-2)
CON: 24% (-2)
REF: 15% (+3)
LDEM: 11% (-)
GRN: 5% (+2)
https://x.com/Samfrspare/status/1800144343745069304
Sam Freedman
@Samfrspare
JLP show same movement to Reform as others. This is the first fully post D-Day poll and doesn't show too big a drop for the Tories (though is the methodology that helps them most and they're on 24%).
----------
The headline figures might look disappointing for Reform - but I think we are going to see crossover today/tomorrow from a polling company that has more favourable methodology to them / less favourable methodology to the Tories.
DYOR but I would lump on those trading bets right now if you can. Lib Dems over 40.5 seats still looks very good to me.
https://x.com/cjsnowdon/status/1800140822501016001
https://x.com/0xgaut/status/1800075579078607268
It actually really smart from Trump, The Cheesecake Factory is incredibly popular restaurant chain. Its aspirational / special occasion place that middle classes in America love to go to eat. Europeans might look at it as rather tacky wannabe proper restaurant, but in US it is much loved.
About a quarter of government spending is welfare payments, and about a half of that is pensions. They are essentially what they are; there's not much political space to cut the number of pensioners or the amount per pensioner, and means testing more will just discourage people from making their own provison.
About another sixth is health and social care. You could transfer that cost to individuals more directly, but the total is mostly what it is- the UK may not be getting as much bang as it likes, but it's also not putting in as much buck as comparable countries.
And every time you resign yourself to saying "no, that's not really cuttable", the percentage you have to find from other areas goes up some more. Which is why we haven't had a proper spending review for a while, which might be why we'r having the election now.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjmmrwexv4ko
Plus Jews still suspicious of Labour and British Hindus proud of Rishi as the first British Asian PM
https://www.fortnumandmason.com/chocolossus-biscuits-600g-tin
Tatton was lost by the Tories in 1997 to Martin Bell remember and voted Remain in 2016
https://electionmaps.uk/nowcast
I hope no one is following this deeply unserious account. Absolutely no way in hell that Corbyn gets only 0.44% in Islington North, even if you think Labour win it.
- Reforming the taxation of international flights to focus on those who fly the most, while reducing costs for ordinary households who take one or two international return flights per year.
- Giving local authorities, including National Park Authorities, the powers to end Right to Buy in their areas
- Improving standards of animal health and welfare in agriculture, including a ban on caged hens.
- Giving local environmental groups a place on water companies’ boards.
- Creating a new Online Crime Agency to effectively tackle illegal content and activity online, such as personal fraud, revenge porn and threats and incitement to violence on social media.
- Tackle child poverty by removing the two-child limit and the benefit cap.
- Introducing a ‘Toddler Top-Up’: an enhanced rate of Child Benefit for one-year olds
- Immediately requiring all new homes and non-domestic buildings to be built to a zero-carbon standard, including being fitted with solar panels, and progressively increasing standards as technology improves
- Setting a 20% higher minimum wage for people on zero-hour contracts at times of normal demand to compensate them for the uncertainty of fluctuating hours of work
- Encourage employers to promote employee ownership by giving staff in listed companies with more than 250 employees a right to request shares, to be held in trust for the benefit of employees
- Taking initial unilateral steps to rebuild the relationship with the EU, starting by declaring a fundamental change in the UK’s approach and improving channels for foreign policy cooperation – seeking to join the Single Market
- Requiring that all Ministers’ instant-messaging conversations involving government business must be placed on the departmental record. Ensuring that a record of all lobbying of Ministers via instant messages, emails, letters and phone calls is published as part of quarterly transparency releases
You get the feeling he was trying to bulk out the size of the list, adding these to the various ones he thought most bonkers.Then again, isn't he the arsehole who had a go at Davey for missing a debate when his son's carer's plans fell through so Davey stayed with his disabled son that evening?
Signs of relief at CCHQ and in No 10 I suspect even if Reform are up at Tory expense, the Greens up almost as much at Labour expense
Hillary was to blame for losing to Trump, whom she should have beaten.
If Man Utd are defeated by Liverpool 7-0 then who shares the blame - the United Manager/Defence/Midfield etc or the Liverpool Manager/Midfield/Strikers etc?
If Liverpool win 7-0 they get the credit while the opposition gets the blame. Similarly with Brexit, blame lies solely on the Europhiles who held all the cards and lost, while credit goes to the Eurosceptics who won.
Clearly one poll and other surveys suggest otherwise but if you do get a Reform squeeze and a slight Lab/Ref overstatement you could see a narrower result than forecast at the moment (though still clear Labour win). Of course, there is no sign that any such squeeze is on right now.
Wirral West 2005 - local swing 3.7% Lab to Con, national swing 3.1% Lab to Con
Wirral West 2010 - local swing 4.4% Lab to Con, national swing 5.0% Lab to Con
Wirral West 2015 - local swing 3.6% Con to Lab, national swing 0.5% Con to Lab
Tatton 2017 - local swing 5.1% Con to Lab, national swing 2.0% Con to Lab
Tatton 2019 - local swing 2.7% Lab to Con, national swing 4.5% Lab to Con
Fair enough, in 2017 McVey was losing any Osborne personal vote but in 2015 and 2019 she should have benefited from the usual boost that any sitting MP gets and she didn't seem to get that, in fact she seems to get an incumbency penalty.
With centralised EU dictats that we had no demos to change at elections, that was undemocratic and didn't happen.
So even if people are unhappy, we've still made progress.
Democracy is the worst available way to run a country, except for all others that have ever been tried.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_tent
1) anything you do every damn day *is* part of your Core Fucking Business
2) its cheaper to insource the things you do every day
3) it’s cheaper to hire permanent staff to do them
4) to save money, you have to spend money
5) improving productivity is an incremental process
https://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2024/03/08/we-need-more-bureaucracy/
Yes, some small relief for the Conservatives - they would still be on the wrong side of an historic defeat but they would likely remain the Official Opposition even with tactical voting.
This was however the same JL Partners who offered a 28% Conservative share just a couple of weeks ago so a four point drop in vote share doesn't suggest a campaign which has been wholly successful.
Let's see what Redfield & Wilton have to offer later this afternoon - will this be the normal 2,000 sample poll or will it be one of their larger "mega" polls with a sample of over 10,000?
https://x.com/jeuasommenulle/status/1800053459195928834
JohannesBorgen
@jeuasommenulle
In other words, I think Macron believes the main risk is for his “heir” not to be in the 2nd round in 2027 while he thinks he can still fairly easily win against Le Pen in the 2nd round. And guess what: LFI/Melenchon scored very bad yesterday. They’ve lost all their momentum.
Of course we should go further and withdraw from the ECHR and any other organisation that seeks to govern us without democratic consent but Brexit was the first huge necessary step
Brexit is Brexit. The Tories are fucked because of Brexit. Because Brexit restored our democracy
Devon & Cornwall have cancelled their retro 60's/70's music festival after a dispute as to whether to put The Jam or Cream on first
One of my abiding memories was during the 2005 campaign when there was speculation about the Tories imploding under Michael Howard, with the LibDems threatening to "decapitate" much of the Tory front-bench. Blair, apparently. expected another 100+ majority. That said, Rishi is in a much deeper hole than Howard ever was.
It is Starmer v Sunak only with Farage and other party leaders excluded. If Rishi knocked it out the park it could yet sway undecideds his way
Few governments even think as far ahead as the next election. And the core vote for the current government give every impression of thinking that the country can fall apart in a decade's time, because they'll be six feet under by then. Just as long as they have a free TV licence in the meantime.
This is not necessarily a good thing for him (although it suggests meltdown less likely over it) as it indicates minds are just set now and a mid to high teens defeat may be unavoidable or at best mitigated to low teens
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndqsvTIveR0
It attracts far more than MAGA faithful, that is why it is very smart line of attack. For Europeans, where mid-level restaurants are generally a lot better than US, it seems tacky and naff. But to Americans, those that can't afford high end fine dining, its what they go for "posh / special" and people with a bit of money, will get lunch or dinner there, as it is far better than most chain fast casual restaurants.
The next one he should go for is somewhere like Chipotle. Reduced portion sizes have been a big thing on social media in the US in regards to this chain.
Otoh, I suspect very few people are changing which way they will vote at this stage , and therefore it's almost entirely a turnout game. In that sense, Reform polling doesn't matter except in a few Brexity seats on the east coast. It's only perhaps the Lib Dems who are gaining votes at the expense of other parties.
Tatler published an article recently on Cheshire and it was mostly on bits of Cheshire within the Tatton constituency (with a bit about Chester because of the Duke of Westminster’s wedding).
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/other/cheshire-hailed-by-tatler-as-celeb-filled-land-of-jimmy-choos-and-wags/ar-BB1nIC61
Mind I was over Wilmslow way on Saturday and didn’t see too many Tory banners (amusingly there is a huge Labour one on the way into Prestbury - but that is a different story and seat). So who can say.
Think Trump Tower....but you go to get a slightly better meal than most US chains and a huge piece of cheesecake. Thus, its the go to location for people for birthdays etc.
In Esther's defence, national swing is the wrong comparator. I think Merseyside has been swinging relatively to Lab for some time. It would be relevant to compare Wirral West to Wirral South, and perhaps to Wallasey and Crosby and its successors; and Tatton to Macclesfield.
As a Manchester professional and north Manchester resident i talk about the 'Chorltonifcation' of the Greater Manchester hinterland as a vast swathe from Ramsbottom in the north to Knutsford in the south comes to resemble hipsterish Chorlton cum Hardy in south Manchester. Its all becoming quite uniform now with hipster beards and artisan bakeries everywhere you turn... which isn't good for Tories even before the present catastrophes began to unfold.
microwave blast cuisine. That is places like Olive Garden or Applebee's. Frankie and Bernie = Applebee's in the US.
But remember even in the UK these days we have a much higher quality when you start to spend £30 a dish.
Hamilton just about performed in line with the decline in safe seats in 97, he'd have possibly lost in a normal fight to Labour in a hyper marginal finish (extra 4% swing on top of UNS)
I see they do a “factory turkey burger”
https://www.thecheesecakefactory.com/menu/glamburgers/factory-turkey-burger
These words must have different connotations in the USA. Honestly America is sometimes so foreign
Last time I was there I did note there was some new (to me) nationwide chain which actually did decent and not disgustingly large oversweet
sandwiches. A bit like an American Pret. I forget the name but it was ok!
I’m back in September and I will try and seek out…. The cheesecake factory
https://www.economist.com/interactive/us-2024-election/trump-biden-polls
Even low end, those brands like Frankie & Bennies on the lower end are in constant struggle because the offering is piss poor. How many "posh" burger places have gone under because people expect more in the UK now.
The issue - “The old plant is expensive and in the wrong place. We need to build a new plant at a different place on the coast”
The government - “Are you fucking insane? You are going to knock down a steel plant in a government constituency. And build a new one in an opposition constituency. That will employ less people. This will cost many millions and will only yield results after the election. Go away and never come back.”
Labour 8/15
Reform UK 13/5
Ashfield Independents 19/4
Conservatives 33/1
Lib Dems 250/1
Green 250/1
Has any party been at longer odds than 33/1 for a seat they currently hold?
Americans are also risk averse when it comes to cuisine. So a chain tells you that you can predict what you’re going to get, which is nice for many people
Btw the food in Ukraine has been really good so far. Same in Moldova. Think they are so poor they have to use fresh local ingredients. Not much processed stuff. It shows
We talked the other day on here why small towns in France can still have high streets that work, where as the UK, its only coffee shops, bars and chain restaurants these days. Wages, rents, rates, etc.
Genuinely ok sarnies
https://citygeographics.org/2022/12/15/tracking-gentrification-in-london-and-manchester-using-the-2021-census-occupational-class-data/
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/poll-trump-biden-neck-and-neck-06-09-2024/
General Election Competition
In how many seats will:
1. Reform beat Conservative (don't count draws)? 152
2. Labour finish 3rd or lower (don't count where they didn't stand)? 110
3. Conservatives lose their deposit? 0
4. Lib Dems lose their deposit? 2
5. Reform lose their deposit? 18
6. Labour lose their deposit? 0
How big:
7. Will the largest winning vote margin be? 41,501
8. Will the biggest notional majority defeated be (only count where the incumbent party stands)? 21,001
How small:
9. Will the smallest winning vote margin be (1st - 2nd)? 48
10. Will the smallest gap between 1st and 3rd be? 700
11. Will the lowest number of votes for any candidate? 56
How many:
12. Parties will be elected (whether or not they take their seats. All true independents are grouped as a single party)? Grouping true indies as one... 12
13. Seats will the Conservatives win? 143
14. Seats will Labour win? 415
15. Seats will Lib Dems win? 41
16. Seats will the SNP win? 23
17. Seats will Sinn Fein win? 7
18. Seats will DUP win? 8
19. Seats will Reform come second in? 89
What percentage vote:
20. Will Conservatives get across the UK? 27%
21. Will Reform get across the UK? 14%
22. Will SNP get in Scotland? 36%
23. Will be lowest of any winning candidate? 19%
24. Will be highest of any 2nd place candidate? 37%
25. Will Speaker get? 65%
Thanks @Farooq
Its like the school dinners here, but in the US you are now paying $20-30-40 (+20% tip) for it.
I can't ever imagine eating the shite in the Cheesecake Factory.