The other way to read this answer is that if every family works hard and sacrifices luxuries they can send their kids to Winchester.
And if they don’t, they’re not making their children‘s education “a priority”.
See, that's exactly my childhood.
Plus my father was convinced getting Sky would impact my grades.
Fortunately we got Sky when I aced my GCSEs.
Wait. You had TV? Luxury.
Growing up, we had three TVs.
I've never had sky (apart from a shared house I lived in where, due to some administrative snafu, we had free cable for a couple of years), and I don't think I've missed out on anything really - I'm not a sports fan - other than the Simpsons in the 90s before Channel 4 got it.
Whenever I've flicked through someone's sky when I've been at their house it always seems to be gazillions of channels of garbage. Even the history channels - and I love history - are rubbish.
I can understand why we have the licence fee, because it funds the BBC and everything it does including radio, etc, etc, and I'm happy to pay for it and not have to watch adverts. I know many aren't fans of the BBC and the 'tax', but I am, despite it not being perfect by any means. We don't appreciate how lucky we are to have it, IMHO.
I understand why the commercial channels have adverts - that's the price to pay of watching it 'free'.
But I could never understand why people had to pay for sky, yet still had to wade through tons of adverts. Why would you pay to watch advertising?
Sports.
Mate I know a bloke who can do you a cracked Firestick for £45 that'll get you everything for free, from across the globe, including those channels that do so much to enhance a gentleman's relaxation time. Screw the man. Fight the power.
Piracy helps terrorism and drug dealers.
I will not be party to such a thing.
Also I cannot have a criminal record with my job.
PLUS
Thanks to a friend who works for Sky I get the friends and family discount so I get Sky Q and three mini boxes, all the channels including Sports, Cinema, Netflix, TNT Sports for £26.50 a month.
Ah, you see, you're part of the problem, perpetuating this country's feudal hierarchy in favour of the boss class. The hardworking common man can't rely on such patronage and 'the old school tie' to get himself such a sweet deal.
So the UK is at the average of seven countries, and the Guardian writes it up as "worse than USA" instead of "better than Japan".
If regional cities are underachieving then perhaps it suggests that all the investment in them has brought a poor return and we should be looking to invest in different areas instead.
The Guardian's suggestion that regional cities are underachieving so invest more might well be a case of throwing good money after bad.
The Guardian also babbles about the 'economic imbalance between the south-east of England and other parts of the UK'.
Well the chief economic imbalance is that in the south-east of England people cannot afford to buy homes and in the rest of the UK it is much easier.
I'm not sure that 'levelling up' the rest of the country to London house prices benefits anyone apart from the rich and rentiers.
Basically they want London wages in the North, Midlands, Scotland and Wales but Northern and Welsh house prices for London and the Home Counties, which is not going to happen
Few seem to appreciate that this scandal, the blood contamination case, the Andy Malkinson case (and other similar ones), the endless NHS and Police scandals are all symptomatic of a shredded administrative and political class lacking in competence, integrity and either the ability to admit to or willingness to correct mistakes.
I found myself in disagreement with this paragraph.
But only because you forgot to mention education...
It's a very long list. Ours was not meant to be comprehensive.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
So the UK is at the average of seven countries, and the Guardian writes it up as "worse than USA" instead of "better than Japan".
If regional cities are underachieving then perhaps it suggests that all the investment in them has brought a poor return and we should be looking to invest in different areas instead.
The Guardian's suggestion that regional cities are underachieving so invest more might well be a case of throwing good money after bad.
The Guardian also babbles about the 'economic imbalance between the south-east of England and other parts of the UK'.
Well the chief economic imbalance is that in the south-east of England people cannot afford to buy homes and in the rest of the UK it is much easier.
I'm not sure that 'levelling up' the rest of the country to London house prices benefits anyone apart from the rich and rentiers.
Basically they want London wages in the North, Midlands, Scotland and Wales but Northern and Welsh house prices for London and the Home Counties, which is not going to happen
I think much of the establishment and many of the rich would prefer to have both Northern wages and London house prices nationwide.
Few seem to appreciate that this scandal, the blood contamination case, the Andy Malkinson case (and other similar ones), the endless NHS and Police scandals are all symptomatic of a shredded administrative and political class lacking in competence, integrity and either the ability to admit to or willingness to correct mistakes.
I found myself in disagreement with this paragraph.
But only because you forgot to mention education...
It's a very long list. Ours was not meant to be comprehensive.
Very good piece.
I’m not usually one to demand heads roll for scandals, but I make exceptions for the Post Office and for those who covered up the grooming gangs.
There’s more than a decade of PO senior management who conspired to cover up this scandal, and their victims deserve to see them in court.
On the Sky stuff. It's universal now. In 15 years time the equivalent will be 'no smartphone' As ever the media are starting to overreach with criticism and the whiff of pile on appears. How the public react to that depends on how far they push it. Brown's handwriting is the guide here, attacking the guy as some sort of monster when he was just naff. Same risk.
It's naff to handwrite letters?
No, the pile on over handwriting was because they were piling on over his general naffness. That was the overreach and it backfired
Sunak does feel quite Gordon Brown-ish. He’s at the stage where he cannot do anything right, gets nervous and makes further gaffes, so the pile-on continues - he’s simply not cut out for the massively high profile role of PM
I learned the other day the concept of the “personality hire”. An employee who is taken on largely because of their social skills, extroversion, emotional intelligence, good humour and charm - and thus their ability to lift spirits in an office, make people smile, smooth out frictions with wit and grace - and thus get them back to work
In a way, the office of Prime Minister is the biggest “personality hire” of all
Neither Sunak nor Brown has the personality. Nor did truss or May. Boris definitely did but had huge flaws otherwise which doomed him. Cameron nearly made it but was too arrogant and vain.
Probably Blair is the last PM with the full skill set
The paradox is that the criminal justice system which the authors rely on to get the right answer now, is one of the principal villains of the piece. It ought to recuse itself wholesale and we can offshore the prosecutions to, I dunno, Rwanda?
One of the most shocking aspects of the PO Scandal is that the very people who should be supporting the legal have been the most prominent in bringing it into disrepute. The awful performance of Lord Grabiner at yesterday's hearing is just one lamentable example.
Don't get Ms C started on this one. She's even more vitriolic than I am, and that's saying something. (And of course, she is a lawyer.)
Labour = Growth; Tories = Stagnation. The last 27 years makes that clear.
Productivity increases = growth No productivity increases = stagnation
The last 300 years make that clear.
Now tell us how to increase productivity.
You can start with telling us how to increase public sector productivity.
What do we mean by public sector productivity?
Part of the reason the NHS is under "pressure" is because so many illnesses and diseases are now fixable. Unlike other sectors, technological advances in health lead to an escalation in costs - pacemakers, statins, Libre (diabetes tech) all improve or extend people's lives, but cost lots of money to deliver.
The only kind of public sector productivity gains you could get that save money are early interventions on obesity, dementia, cancer. Even if such policies are implemented, those savings are never transferred back to the Treasury, instead being used to help with other health issues.
Both of these problems are a good thing, if your objective is to improve the welfare of the British people. Frankly I'm getting a bit frustrated with all these grand, witless statements about how to fix Britain. "Improve productivity", "Abolish quangos", "Burn red tape", "NIMBYism" - it's all a load of facile nonsense.
That technology means we can fix things we can't in the past is an entirely good thing, though you miss the fact that technological improvements also mean we can either fix or manage some things for much cheaper today, that were more expensive in the past.
However there is nothing remotely facile about some of those things you mentioned. NIMBYism in particular is a major blight on this country, whatever your priorities are for investment.
Whether it be more houses you want or flats, more roads or more rails or more cycle paths, more wind turbines or power pylons or phone masts or anything else invested in at all really, NIMBYism and related BANANAism means that investments cost far more than they should, take far longer than they should, and result in far less happening due to investment.
My parents rented a new colour TV in the early 80s
They delivered the wrong one by mistake, and so we had CEEFAX, for a whole week until the rental company figured out the mistake
I remember when BBC2 would broadcast "Pages from Ceefax" so those of us without this wonder of technology could get a glimpse of what we were missing out on.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I see that old chestnut "public sector productivity" has reared its ugly head this morning.
Once we've all got past defining it, the truth is reducing operational costs does not improve productivity, if anything, it makes the situation worse. Has closing operational sector offices in London made the Met more productive? No, because officers take much longer now with suspects as they have to take them further so they are not on patrol.
Is giving an adult or child social worker an extra 10 cases going to make them more productive? Obviously not. Is adding extra clients to domiciliary care teams going to make them more productive? Obviously not.
That's the problem - a mentality which sees the cost of everything and the value of nothing and that was the fundamental flaw with the so-called austerity of 2010 and beyond. Instead of trying to make public services work (and that involves the private sector) it became all about the cost of those services and this was compounded by the fact large parts of the public services were insulated from any reform as a deliberate political act.
Here in Newham we have a big problem with rubbish - lots of people living closely together in an urban environment spawns rubbish. They've changed the collection days (fair enough) but are insisting residents bring their bins to the edge of their property before collection (apparently the "productivity" of the collectors is reduced if they have to gon into a property and bring the bin to the vehicle). That's fine for those who can move full bins of rubbish but some elderly people cannot so immediately the productivity "gain" is compromised.
Unfortunately the Party which has led Government since 2010 is focussed on the cost of services not the quality of the provision and all you end up with is a death s[piral of decline. To break out of that needs a complete redefinition of what public services are or should be and a proper debate with the public (we all use public services to some degree) as to what kind of Services we want and how much we are willing to pay for those Services.
On the Sky stuff. It's universal now. In 15 years time the equivalent will be 'no smartphone' As ever the media are starting to overreach with criticism and the whiff of pile on appears. How the public react to that depends on how far they push it. Brown's handwriting is the guide here, attacking the guy as some sort of monster when he was just naff. Same risk.
It's naff to handwrite letters?
No, the pile on over handwriting was because they were piling on over his general naffness. That was the overreach and it backfired
Sunak does feel quite Gordon Brown-ish. He’s at the stage where he cannot do anything right, gets nervous and makes further gaffes, so the pile-on continues - he’s simply not cut out for the massively high profile role of PM
I learned the other day the concept of the “personality hire”. An employee who is taken on largely because of their social skills, extroversion, emotional intelligence, good humour and charm - and thus their ability to lift spirits in an office, make people smile, smooth out frictions with wit and grace - and thus get them back to work
In a way, the office of Prime Minister is the biggest “personality hire” of all
Neither Sunak nor Brown has the personality. Nor did truss or May. Boris definitely did but had huge flaws otherwise which doomed him. Cameron nearly made it but was too arrogant and vain.
Probably Blair is the last PM with the full skill set
He's probably lucky in a sense its reached utter saturation point now. It's all just noise. A long raspberry that never ends
In that London for the day. Look: warm and blue skies! Also look: The ugliness of London's most important station is incomprehensible!
You've posted the wrong image, you wanted to post a picture of St Pancras station.
When I first took my wife to London, we had several transport options but in the end I went with arriving at St. Pancras.
Because of course you would, the place is absolutely stunning as opposed to the concrete monstrosities that pass for stations on either side of it.
Point of Order: King’s Cross is really nice now as well, they’ve junked all the crap at the front, added a modernist canopy which actually works and impresses - it links neatly to St Pancras
Possibly the best station complex in Europe or even the world
Next best terminals in london in order
Paddington Marylebone (it’s kinda cute) London Bridge (also much improved) Liverpool Street Charing X Victoria Waterloo
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I think it began with the Beveridge report, actually.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
I’ve watched the clip of Sunak arriving for the ITV interview and have to say it discomforts me. I don’t hold any brief for Rishi but I can’t say I see anything particularly egregious in what he says. It’s the sort of ordinary conversation almost any of us would engage in in the situation.
I actually think Sunak has been stitched up by the release of a clip that wouldn’t ordinarily see the light of day. I still think that he should have done the event he skipped but this doesn’t make the situation worse for me. He was clearly a bit behind schedule and was explaining why, he wasn’t dissing anyone.
I also think that we can’t complain that politicians are always in political mode if journalists are going to play gotcha with clips like this. Unfortunately mostly our instincts are to absolutely put the boot into a man when he’s down, I’m sure I’ve succumbed in my time, but the world might be a slightly better place if we resisted a little more.
On the Sky stuff. It's universal now. In 15 years time the equivalent will be 'no smartphone' As ever the media are starting to overreach with criticism and the whiff of pile on appears. How the public react to that depends on how far they push it. Brown's handwriting is the guide here, attacking the guy as some sort of monster when he was just naff. Same risk.
It's naff to handwrite letters?
No, the pile on over handwriting was because they were piling on over his general naffness. That was the overreach and it backfired
Sunak does feel quite Gordon Brown-ish. He’s at the stage where he cannot do anything right, gets nervous and makes further gaffes, so the pile-on continues - he’s simply not cut out for the massively high profile role of PM
I learned the other day the concept of the “personality hire”. An employee who is taken on largely because of their social skills, extroversion, emotional intelligence, good humour and charm - and thus their ability to lift spirits in an office, make people smile, smooth out frictions with wit and grace - and thus get them back to work
In a way, the office of Prime Minister is the biggest “personality hire” of all
Neither Sunak nor Brown has the personality. Nor did truss or May. Boris definitely did but had huge flaws otherwise which doomed him. Cameron nearly made it but was too arrogant and vain.
Probably Blair is the last PM with the full skill set
I remain fascinated by the Head Boy thing. It's the lowest stakes appointment in the world, the only qualification needed is unlikelihood of being taken in for drunk and disorderly or molesting the new boys. Perhaps they thought As it doesn't matter in the slightest let's go with a non WASP day boy for the look of the thing, and permanently overinflated his self worth.
My parents rented a new colour TV in the early 80s
They delivered the wrong one by mistake, and so we had CEEFAX, for a whole week until the rental company figured out the mistake
I remember when BBC2 would broadcast "Pages from Ceefax" so those of us without this wonder of technology could get a glimpse of what we were missing out on.
I remember the TV broadcasting hours steadily filling up in the 1980s:
1983 Breakfast TV 1986 Late night TV 1988 Morning TV
So the entire political and administrative system has zero competence or integrity, going beyond short term political stuff and legitimising a boycott of the state. What's the alternative?
Looking at the polls this morning and we seem to have two divergent sets evolving.
On the one hand, there are the "35ers" - those who have Conservative plus Reform at or around 35 which can means anything from 25-10 through 20-15 to 18-17 and the "39ers" which are Focaldata and JL Partners which have 24-15 as the split.
The Lab/LD/Green split is more consistent - between 56 (Focaldata) and 61 (YouGov).
In December 2019, the split was 48-47 so if it's now 35-60 that's a 13% move across the two blocs.
Few seem to appreciate that this scandal, the blood contamination case, the Andy Malkinson case (and other similar ones), the endless NHS and Police scandals are all symptomatic of a shredded administrative and political class lacking in competence, integrity and either the ability to admit to or willingness to correct mistakes.
I found myself in disagreement with this paragraph.
But only because you forgot to mention education...
It's a very long list. Ours was not meant to be comprehensive.
Thanks to you and Ms Free for the threader. It is important.
(Dons flameproof coat)
But I'd also take a contrary view: there is much in this country that does work. Yes, there are failures - far too many, in fact. Yes, things are under an increasing strain that needs relieving - somehow. Yet when things work, as they do the vast majority of the time, it is not noticed. When my son was ill recently, the experience with all levels of the NHS was brilliant. A friend's unusual and non-straightforward issue was sorted out by the council speedily and compassionately. Things often work well.
The failures are all too noticeable, and often hideous. However I'm unsure that they are more widespread than they used to be, or even more egregious - perhaps it is now much easier for these things to come, eventually and belatedly, into the public domain. I'm very unsure the Post Office scandal is anywhere near unique in British history.
I don't want this to sound complacent; as I said, there are too many failures, and a reluctance to hold people to account for them, and/or learn lessons. But neither is right to think of Britain as a failed state. We're not.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too
This assertion is based on the Tories record of raising taxes to their highest ever level?
Oh, no, I forgot. The entire Tory strategy is to pretend that they have not been the government for the past 14 years.
So the entire political and administrative system has zero competence or integrity, going beyond short term political stuff and legitimising a boycott of the state. What's the alternative?
Me becoming the country's first directly elected dictator.
So the entire political and administrative system has zero competence or integrity, going beyond short term political stuff and legitimising a boycott of the state. What's the alternative?
Me becoming the country's first directly elected dictator.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I think it began with the Beveridge report, actually.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
Have you read Corelli Barnett's 'The Lost Victory' ?
He takes great pleasure in mocking the public school / oxbridge members in Atlee's government.
So the UK is at the average of seven countries, and the Guardian writes it up as "worse than USA" instead of "better than Japan".
Maybe they wrote it up as both:
Lyon and Frankfurt were ranked more highly than Birmingham and Manchester and made the difference between the UK being the top-ranked G7 economy behind the US and remaining a middle-ranking country.
Canada, Italy and Japan were ranked lower than the UK, according to a measure of output per hour.
Yes - that's the difference between looking for excuses, and seeking to do better. I know which approach I'd prefer.
My Dad was sent to a private boarding school for his A-levels (it was thought that it would be easier for him to get into university from a British school than from a Hong Kong one - how times have changed).
He hated it. So it was never an option that we would be sent to private school. My parents probably could have afforded it, and it probably would have involved doing without a lot of things (though we never had Sky anyway).
I really think the sneering at Sunak for talking about going without Sky is wrongheaded. In general, Britain needs to learn the lesson of delayed gratification. Of investing money in the present in return for a payoff in the future, instead of a financial shortcut to get a payoff in the present at the expense of higher costs in the future.
If you wanted a succinct explanation of where Britain has gone wrong over the last few decades, and what it needs to do to correct things, that's it.
As soon as anyone tries to talk about anything in those terms they are hit with a barrage of sneering.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The money hosed at the NHS tends to get recycled back into corporates who run increasingly large chunks of privatised healthcare. Take nurses - the reason for shortages is that many 'leave the profession' but actually take up agency works which pays them more (and the NHS pay the agencies a fortune to plug the gaps). There is no morale within NHS Teams because frankly no-one really knows anyone and the personnel keep changing. So inefficiencies spiral as do costs for a worse service. It happens everywhere.
We have plenty of money. It's simply being siphoned off everywhere due to kleptocracy.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
Yes, you need to believe in growth. If you just do that, all the country's problems will disappear.
You don't just need to believe in growth, you need to create the conditions where growth can happen.
There are two ways to do that.
1: Stop trying to prevent growth from happening - cf. NIMBYism.
2: Invest in that which can allow growth to happen.
Too many people actively want to prevent growth from happening. We see it all the time in complaints from "it will spoil my view" through to "it will induce demand" (another term for induced demand is growth).
So the UK is at the average of seven countries, and the Guardian writes it up as "worse than USA" instead of "better than Japan".
Maybe they wrote it up as both:
Lyon and Frankfurt were ranked more highly than Birmingham and Manchester and made the difference between the UK being the top-ranked G7 economy behind the US and remaining a middle-ranking country.
Canada, Italy and Japan were ranked lower than the UK, according to a measure of output per hour.
Yes - that's the difference between looking for excuses, and seeking to do better. I know which approach I'd prefer.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I think it began with the Beveridge report, actually.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
Have you read Corelli Barnett's 'The Lost Victory' ?
He takes great pleasure in mocking the public school / oxbridge members in Atlee's government.
Although to be fair by far the worst offender in the Attlee government was Shinwell, who was neither.
So the entire political and administrative system has zero competence or integrity, going beyond short term political stuff and legitimising a boycott of the state. What's the alternative?
The introduction of my new voting system. It combines all voting systems (FPTP, AV etc) in perfect harmony. It has instant counting. Impersonation and vote theft is impossible. It delivers the perfect result every time.
One Man. One Vote.
EDIT: Opinion polls will be 100% accurate. Always.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The money hosed at the NHS tends to get recycled back into corporates who run increasingly large chunks of privatised healthcare. Take nurses - the reason for shortages is that many 'leave the profession' but actually take up agency works which pays them more (and the NHS pay the agencies a fortune to plug the gaps). There is no morale within NHS Teams because frankly no-one really knows anyone and the personnel keep changing. So inefficiencies spiral as do costs for a worse service. It happens everywhere.
We have plenty of money. It's simply being siphoned off everywhere due to kleptocracy.
As you say, nurses get paid more this way. If inefficiency means workers are getting paid more, the solution is pretty clear, but tricky.
One of my memories of TVs in the 1970s is that the sets were very unreliable. Having someone round to repair the TV was a regular occurrence.
Also, when we first got a colour TV, it was a bit of a downer when half the programmes being broadcast were in black and white.
Another also, I would be up early on a Sunday morning watching Open University broadcasts, as that is all there was to watch. That and Nai Zindagi Naya Jeevan, which I found even harder to follow than the degree-level physics!
We didn't get a colour TV until the late 70s. The excitement of seeing the BBC Globe in blue was palpable.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
Yes, you need to believe in growth. If you just do that, all the country's problems will disappear.
You don't just need to believe in growth, you need to create the conditions where growth can happen.
There are two ways to do that.
1: Stop trying to prevent growth from happening - cf. NIMBYism.
2: Invest in that which can allow growth to happen.
Too many people actively want to prevent growth from happening. We see it all the time in complaints from "it will spoil my view" through to "it will induce demand" (another term for induced demand is growth).
Indeed, the only time induced demand does not exist is for cycling.
So the UK is at the average of seven countries, and the Guardian writes it up as "worse than USA" instead of "better than Japan".
If regional cities are underachieving then perhaps it suggests that all the investment in them has brought a poor return and we should be looking to invest in different areas instead.
The Guardian's suggestion that regional cities are underachieving so invest more might well be a case of throwing good money after bad.
The Guardian also babbles about the 'economic imbalance between the south-east of England and other parts of the UK'.
Well the chief economic imbalance is that in the south-east of England people cannot afford to buy homes and in the rest of the UK it is much easier.
I'm not sure that 'levelling up' the rest of the country to London house prices benefits anyone apart from the rich and rentiers.
I don't think you've understood what this story is about at all. It's about a report that has recommendations for improving regional productivity through better planning laws, reforms to local government, and spending the money the government has earmarked for regional innovation but failed to spend.
It's not really about house prices.
House prices are the most prominent difference between London and the rest of the country.
They should always be mentioned when these 'other places need to be more like London' stories appear.
As top the rest you lost me at 'reforms to local government'.
What ANOTHER reform to local government.
I'd suggest that perhaps one of the problems is that we never stop implementing reforms in local government and public services leading to disruption caused by too much change.
Well you're welcome to criticise the report on the basis of it being wrong in its prescriptions. But when you have an article about productivity and you go mental because it's not talking about house prices... that seems a bit weird. If the article was about regional inequality in general and you feel it was missing an important element, fair enough. But the thing is, you can't always talk about every tangentially related subject at every possible opportunity. We can talk about productivity without necessarily talking about house prices, monetarism, avian flu, the use of Latin in taxonomy, the best techniques for securely joining timber frames, or the most favourable targets in the solar system for mineral extraction. Everything is related to everything else, but a newspaper article isn't meant to be an encyclopedia or everything.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I think it began with the Beveridge report, actually.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
Few seem to appreciate that this scandal, the blood contamination case, the Andy Malkinson case (and other similar ones), the endless NHS and Police scandals are all symptomatic of a shredded administrative and political class lacking in competence, integrity and either the ability to admit to or willingness to correct mistakes.
I found myself in disagreement with this paragraph.
But only because you forgot to mention education...
Do we need a British ENA, where instead of filling the national administration and top echelons of the civil service with people who have Mickey Mouse degrees such as PPE and Classics from Oxbridge we educate waves of competent students in a suitable mix of economics, law, politics, planning, business studies, sociology and most vitally ethics.
Give a large cadre of students the chance to get a degree that fast tracks them to the civil service or local government where they have been taught about what makes a country tick, what all the parts do, where tax revenue is made and how. Teach them about the benefits system and the justice system so they understand how it “works” and then they can properly think constructively about how it might be improved.
It can then be a badge where, when they are standing for election, they can show they actually have been taught about what they intend to do, a sort of electoral British Kite Mark.
That sounds great - the French system - but government by Enarques (eg Manny Macron) has led France to the brink of a Far Right government
Perhaps that is why Macron scrapped the ENA
Who says my long term goal with a British ENa isn’t to lead us to a far right government?
Only joking.
There were problems with the ENA in that it was quite socially rarefied and had the same domination as Oxbridge in the UK whereas I would want the British one to be a degree course, rather than a place, on offer at multiple universities around the UK to increase the breadth of applicants and product.
If it was solely in London like ENA in Paris then the cost of being a student in London would put off a lot of people whereas if it was on offer in universities in all the main Cities and big towns, and maybe it’s own blind entrance exam, then it could work.
I think the issue with EBA (and other grandes ecoles in France) is not so much the socially rarefied atmosphere but rather the typically French economic structure that harks back to the guilds and closed shops of the middle ages.
Just about every sector in France is protected by either regulatory or qualification barriers to entry. It's as true with plumbers or carpenters or waiters as it is with politicians or CEOs, and is also true of products (think wine appellations).
The aim is quality assurance, and it's certainly true the skilled tradesmen in France have much more formal training and are more closely regulated than their counterparts in the UK. It's much harder to be a cowboy, unless you operate in the grey economy.
That can be positive for the customer but it also brings problems: lack of choice and competition, idees fixes, producer-centric attitudes. A sort of 2-tier system where anyone not formally qualified is seen as little more than a petit bricoleur. All the result of a system that creates regulatory oligopoly.
The Anglo Saxon approach is more free-market and unregulated. But of course unregulated systems create monopolies and oligopolies too through force of money. Hence we get Oxbridge and the Ivy League. Informal closed shops rather than formal ones. But still easier to break into than the French official closed shops.
The US, by that standard, is French rather than Anglo Saxon. For example, you can't cut someone's nails without the right license.
Looking at the polls this morning and we seem to have two divergent sets evolving.
On the one hand, there are the "35ers" - those who have Conservative plus Reform at or around 35 which can means anything from 25-10 through 20-15 to 18-17 and the "39ers" which are Focaldata and JL Partners which have 24-15 as the split.
The Lab/LD/Green split is more consistent - between 56 (Focaldata) and 61 (YouGov).
In December 2019, the split was 48-47 so if it's now 35-60 that's a 13% move across the two blocs.
Why is a 5pp range more consistent than a 4pp range? I'm misunderstanding something.
On the Post Office specifically, does it need saving at all? Does it have any functions that cannot be performed by other organisations?
On governance of public institutions more generally, I am not sure what to suggest.
The most obvious thing is to suggest that change can only come following leadership from the top. We would need our politicians to show a clear example of choosing to do something that is difficult and right, rather than easier and in their self-interest. When government is run on the principle of escaping scrutiny, of finding spin lines to talk away failure, of never admitting to a mistake if it can be avoided, then it is no surprise that the leadership of other institutions follow suit.
Any government inevitably makes lots of mistakes. Everyone inevitably makes lots of mistakes. I don't expect us to become better at admitting them, but I think if we did so it would improve things.
Yes, it would.
The causes of the scandal are many and various but no-one can dispute that the failureof the sole shareholder, the Government, to hold the organisation properly to account was a majorfactor. That is something that can be addressed right now in respect of all Government owned businessed, and at precious little cost.
It's too late for the PO, but others could benefit from an acceptance by politicians that they are responsible for enduring proper accountability of such bodies.
It is after one very good reason why we elect them.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too
Give it a break HY
I like a lot of your comments on here but you’re better than tory puff posts
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The money hosed at the NHS tends to get recycled back into corporates who run increasingly large chunks of privatised healthcare. Take nurses - the reason for shortages is that many 'leave the profession' but actually take up agency works which pays them more (and the NHS pay the agencies a fortune to plug the gaps). There is no morale within NHS Teams because frankly no-one really knows anyone and the personnel keep changing. So inefficiencies spiral as do costs for a worse service. It happens everywhere.
We have plenty of money. It's simply being siphoned off everywhere due to kleptocracy.
As you say, nurses get paid more this way. If inefficiency means workers are getting paid more, the solution is pretty clear, but tricky.
Nationally negotiated pay scales are especially absurd.
I still recall the comic horror when a parent at the Free School suggested we use some of the piles of money we were accumulating in the PTA fund to top up teachers pay - lots of ex private school parents who thought that buying £250 of raffle tickets was how things rolled.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
Yes, you need to believe in growth. If you just do that, all the country's problems will disappear.
You don't just need to believe in growth, you need to create the conditions where growth can happen.
There are two ways to do that.
1: Stop trying to prevent growth from happening - cf. NIMBYism.
2: Invest in that which can allow growth to happen.
Too many people actively want to prevent growth from happening. We see it all the time in complaints from "it will spoil my view" through to "it will induce demand" (another term for induced demand is growth).
Indeed, the only time induced demand does not exist is for cycling.
I don't use Twitter so have no idea what that link says, if you have something to say then say it.
As you know I strongly support in investing in the Dutch policies of consistently building new roads and cycle paths and believe doing so creates the conditions for both better growth and standards of living.
If we had Dutch levels of roads and cycle paths then both our roads and our cycling would be much better, we'd be more productive and have more demand.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I think it began with the Beveridge report, actually.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
How many of the PO leadership were Oxbridge ?
Paula Vennells was University of Bradford Adam Crozier was Heriot-Watt
Weird road rage incident this morning. I'm cruising (on bike) through a small village, there's an older man (60s? 70s?) in front going fairly slowly and I'm checking traffic to overtake. Chelsea tractor appears, fairly - but not really excessively - quickly at the end of the drive to one of the houses, but stops before crossing pavement, no more than say 20-30cm (tops) of car is on dropped section of pavement, which is at least 1.5m wide. Older cyclist is probably ~5m from dropped kerb when car appears. Older cyclist continues, without any apparent wobbles, but proceeds to flip the bird aggressively to the driver no less than five times. I overtake while this is happening and don't think the older cyclist sees me at all. Driver (female, 30s-40s) looks pretty startled by cyclist's reaction, but isn't reacting as far as I can see.
I can understand the older cyclist being a bit startled by sudden appearance of the car (but should really be anticipating cars looking to exit driveways) but the driver has not, as far as I can see, done anything wrong really or caused any danger.
The other way to read this answer is that if every family works hard and sacrifices luxuries they can send their kids to Winchester.
And if they don’t, they’re not making their children‘s education “a priority”.
See, that's exactly my childhood.
Plus my father was convinced getting Sky would impact my grades.
Fortunately we got Sky when I aced my GCSEs.
Wait. You had TV? Luxury.
Growing up, we had three TVs.
Until I was 11 we only had a black and white TV. And it was a portable! And it wasn't so my parents could send us to Winchester. You've not lived until you've watched snooker in black and white.
That's my favourite 'Colemanballs'.
"For those of you with Black and white TVs the brown ball is behind the yellow"
So the UK is at the average of seven countries, and the Guardian writes it up as "worse than USA" instead of "better than Japan".
Maybe they wrote it up as both:
Lyon and Frankfurt were ranked more highly than Birmingham and Manchester and made the difference between the UK being the top-ranked G7 economy behind the US and remaining a middle-ranking country.
Canada, Italy and Japan were ranked lower than the UK, according to a measure of output per hour.
So the UK is at the average of seven countries, and the Guardian writes it up as "worse than USA" instead of "better than Japan".
Maybe they wrote it up as both:
Lyon and Frankfurt were ranked more highly than Birmingham and Manchester and made the difference between the UK being the top-ranked G7 economy behind the US and remaining a middle-ranking country.
Canada, Italy and Japan were ranked lower than the UK, according to a measure of output per hour.
Nice try. But they said growth was slower, not faster, than it otherwise would have been.
Well, yes. Policy recommendations should be framed as "here's how we can do better [with examples if they exist]". Framing things as "look how much worse we could be" is a recipe for inaction.
The goal of policy should be to improve our lives, not to tell us how good we have it.
Weird road rage incident this morning. I'm cruising (on bike) through a small village, there's an older man (60s? 70s?) in front going fairly slowly and I'm checking traffic to overtake. Chelsea tractor appears, fairly - but not really excessively - quickly at the end of the drive to one of the houses, but stops before crossing pavement, no more than say 20-30cm (tops) of car is on dropped section of pavement, which is at least 1.5m wide. Older cyclist is probably ~5m from dropped kerb when car appears. Older cyclist continues, without any apparent wobbles, but proceeds to flip the bird aggressively to the driver no less than five times. I overtake while this is happening and don't think the older cyclist sees me at all. Driver (female, 30s-40s) looks pretty startled by cyclist's reaction, but isn't reacting as far as I can see.
I can understand the older cyclist being a bit startled by sudden appearance of the car (but should really be anticipating cars looking to exit driveways) but the driver has not, as far as I can see, done anything wrong really or caused any danger.
See also the discussion at the end of the last thread regarding political disillusionment.
The parties are again peddling dishonest prospectuses ahead of the next election. They know it; much of electorate knows it; and yet they're terrified to discuss what actually addressing our problems is likely to mean, in case it loses them votes at the margin.
Brexit, again, is the poster child for that. A decade long distraction from anything practical, which has delivered nothing.
So we have a political class which almost no one trusts, and a criminal justice system which threatens to head the same way.
The crisis of trust goes far beyond that -
Media: untrusted, massively
"Experts": untrusted, it is all politicised after Brexit (from either angle)
Science: untrusted that's why Lab Leak was such a horrific own goal, why listen to "the science" ever again?
And it is all going to get WORSE as we drown in a morass of highly plausible fake news and hoax videos
Who do people trust now? Their friends, or what they see on Facebook and TikTok
The post-truth, post-trust society; I fear it really could get messy
But conspiracy theories are your stock in trade! There's no week where we don't have you breathlessly boosting some kind of fake news. You push aliens, fake Trump narratives, snipers on the roof ready to murder French protesters, any old rubbish. You're constantly shitting the bed about anything that's reported by some crappy anonymous far-right Twitter account. Post-truth? You're the biggest sucker on here.
Lab leak. Necklace. Covid. Nordstream. ALSO LOADS OF THINGS I CAN’T MENTION
Here’s my latest office-cum-balcony. You can just see the Black Sea and the port of Odessa through the trees. It’s really quite idyllic, apart from the brutal nightly air attacks
You should fly over and escape the British weather, stop staring at bollards in drizzly Dundee
Errrr
Except we know that Nord Stream was done by the Ukrainians. The New York Times even published their names, and even the name of the boat they used.
It is very much like that here. On the one hand it is paradisical - perfect weather, beautiful city, laughing young people, everyone REALLY keen to have a good time, on the other hand there is a terrible war on, the drones come at night, men hobble around on crutches
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too
Give it a break HY
I like a lot of your comments on here but you’re better than tory puff posts
He's correct.
Taxes are going up whoever wins we just dont know by how much.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too
Yes, because the Triple Lock has done nothing to increase taxes on workers.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too
Yes, because the Triple Lock has done nothing to increase taxes on workers.
Errr.
The triple lock is a self financing ponzi scheme now that more pensioners are paying tax than people in work
Rishi giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
I'd start with DCMS; if there are 3 things the state shouldn't get involved in they are culture, media and sport.
Just as a matter of interest, how much of the UK's Government spending goes on DCMS?
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too
Yes, because the Triple Lock has done nothing to increase taxes on workers.
Errr.
And the quadruple lock will do nothing to increase taxes on workers either. 🤦♂️
Freezing tax thresholds so those on unearned incomes paid more tax as a stealth tax, while workers got a tax cut via NI was a reasonable Hunt policy.
Sunak has found a way to completely undermine it. Now only workers have frozen tax thresholds, well done. 🤦♂️
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
Yes, you need to believe in growth. If you just do that, all the country's problems will disappear.
You don't just need to believe in growth, you need to create the conditions where growth can happen.
There are two ways to do that.
1: Stop trying to prevent growth from happening - cf. NIMBYism.
2: Invest in that which can allow growth to happen.
Too many people actively want to prevent growth from happening. We see it all the time in complaints from "it will spoil my view" through to "it will induce demand" (another term for induced demand is growth).
Indeed, the only time induced demand does not exist is for cycling.
Nice vid. We've had discussions about the barriers to cycling and the kit you need for some tracks or to be safe on-road. But somethnig like that you can do on any old bike, in normal clothes with - maybe* - a £15-£20 light set from halfords or ebay
*is it a legal requirement to have lights on a dedicated, lit, cycle path?
On the Post Office specifically, does it need saving at all? Does it have any functions that cannot be performed by other organisations?
On governance of public institutions more generally, I am not sure what to suggest.
The most obvious thing is to suggest that change can only come following leadership from the top. We would need our politicians to show a clear example of choosing to do something that is difficult and right, rather than easier and in their self-interest. When government is run on the principle of escaping scrutiny, of finding spin lines to talk away failure, of never admitting to a mistake if it can be avoided, then it is no surprise that the leadership of other institutions follow suit.
Any government inevitably makes lots of mistakes. Everyone inevitably makes lots of mistakes. I don't expect us to become better at admitting them, but I think if we did so it would improve things.
Yes, it would.
The causes of the scandal are many and various but no-one can dispute that the failureof the sole shareholder, the Government, to hold the organisation properly to account was a majorfactor. That is something that can be addressed right now in respect of all Government owned businessed, and at precious little cost.
It's too late for the PO, but others could benefit from an acceptance by politicians that they are responsible for enduring proper accountability of such bodies.
It is after one very good reason why we elect them.
The politicans will of course argue that the *whole point* of separating these organisations from direct government into Qangoes, is so that the ministers don’t find their own heads of the chopping block when things go wrong.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too
Give it a break HY
I like a lot of your comments on here but you’re better than tory puff posts
He's correct.
Taxes are going up whoever wins we just dont know by how much.
They may but that’s not the point. The tories don’t have a leg to stand on with regards to either tax or spending. Posting something like this:
'The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government. A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too.’
The Corbyn 17 campaign in reverse it is. 'Stop the super majority' and hope they overreact and they get within a few points Not going to work. You can't run that from power.
Nice header. Benefitted from (I guess) PtP's input as it's a bit of an easier read than some cyclefree headers - flows a little better - while also having cyclefree's insight and knowledge.I'd be very happy to see more collaborations!
One thing that strikes me is, given how emblematic this is of recent decline, why Starmer isn't making more of this. I can understand Davey keeping quiet and of course Labour is also implicated, but probably not the current team. Or are there senior labour figures also embroiled in this?
It's a sad state of affairs if a scandal goes on long enough to implicate all major parties that none will then run with it.
Thank you, Seleban. Very kind.
The piece is about 95% Cyclefree. I top and tailed an email she sent me recently, but mostly it appears verbatim. Naturally I agree with everything she says here and am delighted to be associated with such an authority on the subject.
There is much more to said, particularly in respect of the points you make, but I will come back to them shortly. I didn't know the piece was going up this morning and was surprised to find it there when I came back from walking the dogs. I want to respond to each of those who have been good enough to express their views.
Ms C is very busy these days and I am not sure if she is able to respond directly herself, but in her absence I think I can answer most points without misrepresenting either of us.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too
Yes, because the Triple Lock has done nothing to increase taxes on workers.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
A dismal response in all honesty - more cuts, the classic Conservative argument.
Sunak, as Chancellor, presided over a huge rise in borrowing, yes, some of it to cover the economic damage of the pandemic. He's also presided over stealth tax rises by freezing thresholds which has brought more people into higher rate taxation.
@Leon said the Government should have implemented a one-off Pandemic tax to recoup the losses - a classic example of the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away but not an unreasonable suggestion as perhaps trying to raise £100 billion to offset the borrowings on a one-off basis wouldn't have been popular but would have left us in a better position than we face now.
The "answer", if there is one, and there isn't just one, is to look at the forms of wealth. Windows were taxed once so taxing land value isn't the worst idea.
The other side of the answer is cultural and political - the notion we can have a low tax, high quality service economy just doesn't fly (it might do in some parts of the world). IF we want high quality services we will have to accept levels of personal taxation which make the current levels look mild. IF we want to pay less tax, someone has to spell out what will mean for service provision at the most basic level.
@another_richard won't like it but it is about reforming local Government but less the structures than how those structures are funded with much more being raised locally via differential Council Tax rates and more bands. It's politically nasty but if you are a Government with a majority of 200+ you have the opportunity to take those risks and have that debate.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I think it began with the Beveridge report, actually.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
How many of the PO leadership were Oxbridge ?
Paula Vennells was University of Bradford Adam Crozier was Heriot-Watt
Though TBF many of the ministers who, as PtP points, out failed to take sufficient interest in the business they controlled were indeed Oxbridge.
Few seem to appreciate that this scandal, the blood contamination case, the Andy Malkinson case (and other similar ones), the endless NHS and Police scandals are all symptomatic of a shredded administrative and political class lacking in competence, integrity and either the ability to admit to or willingness to correct mistakes.
I found myself in disagreement with this paragraph.
But only because you forgot to mention education...
Do we need a British ENA, where instead of filling the national administration and top echelons of the civil service with people who have Mickey Mouse degrees such as PPE and Classics from Oxbridge we educate waves of competent students in a suitable mix of economics, law, politics, planning, business studies, sociology and most vitally ethics.
Give a large cadre of students the chance to get a degree that fast tracks them to the civil service or local government where they have been taught about what makes a country tick, what all the parts do, where tax revenue is made and how. Teach them about the benefits system and the justice system so they understand how it “works” and then they can properly think constructively about how it might be improved.
It can then be a badge where, when they are standing for election, they can show they actually have been taught about what they intend to do, a sort of electoral British Kite Mark.
That sounds great - the French system - but government by Enarques (eg Manny Macron) has led France to the brink of a Far Right government
Perhaps that is why Macron scrapped the ENA
Who says my long term goal with a British ENa isn’t to lead us to a far right government?
Only joking.
There were problems with the ENA in that it was quite socially rarefied and had the same domination as Oxbridge in the UK whereas I would want the British one to be a degree course, rather than a place, on offer at multiple universities around the UK to increase the breadth of applicants and product.
If it was solely in London like ENA in Paris then the cost of being a student in London would put off a lot of people whereas if it was on offer in universities in all the main Cities and big towns, and maybe it’s own blind entrance exam, then it could work.
I think the issue with EBA (and other grandes ecoles in France) is not so much the socially rarefied atmosphere but rather the typically French economic structure that harks back to the guilds and closed shops of the middle ages.
Just about every sector in France is protected by either regulatory or qualification barriers to entry. It's as true with plumbers or carpenters or waiters as it is with politicians or CEOs, and is also true of products (think wine appellations).
The aim is quality assurance, and it's certainly true the skilled tradesmen in France have much more formal training and are more closely regulated than their counterparts in the UK. It's much harder to be a cowboy, unless you operate in the grey economy.
That can be positive for the customer but it also brings problems: lack of choice and competition, idees fixes, producer-centric attitudes. A sort of 2-tier system where anyone not formally qualified is seen as little more than a petit bricoleur. All the result of a system that creates regulatory oligopoly.
The Anglo Saxon approach is more free-market and unregulated. But of course unregulated systems create monopolies and oligopolies too through force of money. Hence we get Oxbridge and the Ivy League. Informal closed shops rather than formal ones. But still easier to break into than the French official closed shops.
I am sure Cyclefree prefers the French system, regulate the cowboys out of existence. Plus also then add on jail anybody who has ever made or advised a wrong call in any organisation
People make mistakes all the time.
To err is human.
It's when you start lying to cover them up that the problems start. And then when you keep lying, and you allow innocent people to go to jail so you don't have to admit you made an error. Well, then I think it's just possible that the wrong people (you know, the ones who didn't make a "bad call") are the ones going to jail.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
Yes, you need to believe in growth. If you just do that, all the country's problems will disappear.
You don't just need to believe in growth, you need to create the conditions where growth can happen.
There are two ways to do that.
1: Stop trying to prevent growth from happening - cf. NIMBYism.
2: Invest in that which can allow growth to happen.
Too many people actively want to prevent growth from happening. We see it all the time in complaints from "it will spoil my view" through to "it will induce demand" (another term for induced demand is growth).
Indeed, the only time induced demand does not exist is for cycling.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I think it began with the Beveridge report, actually.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
How many of the PO leadership were Oxbridge ?
Paula Vennells was University of Bradford Adam Crozier was Heriot-Watt
Though TBF many of the ministers who, as PtP points, out failed to take sufficient interest in the business they controlled were indeed Oxbridge.
With a full ballot prompt, we are seeing the initial effects of tactical voting. Asked the direct question. a plurality say they would"
"Would you or would you not vote for a party that was not your first choice in order to stop a party that you dislike from winning?"
Would - 45% Would not - 43% Don’t know - 12%
45% are prepared to vote for a party which is not their first choice, if it meant denying a party they did not like from winning. We see evidence of this in the voting intention figures too, where 38% of 2019 Lib Dem voters say they intend to vote Labour, as do 9% of Green voters. 6% of Labour 2019 voters say they will vote Green, 5% for the Lib Dems.
My parents rented a new colour TV in the early 80s
They delivered the wrong one by mistake, and so we had CEEFAX, for a whole week until the rental company figured out the mistake
Kids today.
They haven't lived until they've watched a football match on CEEFAX.
I remember watching F1 races on Ceefex in the late ‘80s, seeing the lap chart refresh every couple of minutes and seeing who’d overtaken or retired!
Now we have every session of the whole weekend shown live, plus about six hours of magazine shows and another six hours of support races.
No F1 this weekend, so will be watching the 24h from Le Mans instead.
Does anyone watch anything live on TV any more, apart from sports and the occasional political debate?
Those were the days.
Live TV only happens for sport in this household (and the bit of breaking news).
My kids think I am lying to them when I tell them when I was their age there were about 12 league games shown live per season.
Yet Premier League football is just about the only professional sport where there are still matches that don’t get televised live.
Unless you live abroad, or have an internet. An anomoly that I’m amazed they haven’t yet fixed.
It doesn't need fixing. The blackout isn't going anywhere and rightly so. And ending Premier League 3pm kick offs isn't happening either.
It absolutely needs fixing. In this day and age the idea you can only watch the game live is via piracy just feeds piracy.
Pandora's box has been opened, the blackout doesn't exist anymore, you can't prevent people watching the games live if they have access to the internet - so all it does is make people do so illegally.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I think it began with the Beveridge report, actually.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
How many of the PO leadership were Oxbridge ?
Paula Vennells was University of Bradford Adam Crozier was Heriot-Watt
Though TBF many of the ministers who, as PtP points, out failed to take sufficient interest in the business they controlled were indeed Oxbridge.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I think it began with the Beveridge report, actually.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
How many of the PO leadership were Oxbridge ?
Paula Vennells was University of Bradford Adam Crozier was Heriot-Watt
Though TBF many of the ministers who, as PtP points, out failed to take sufficient interest in the business they controlled were indeed Oxbridge.
How many of the Consultants were Oxbridge?
Was there an impact of the traditional rush to recruit 2.1s or above from "top" universites, and drive them hard?
Are we being impacted by the consequences of a folk-belief in the effectiveness of generalised, context-free management techniques?
Few seem to appreciate that this scandal, the blood contamination case, the Andy Malkinson case (and other similar ones), the endless NHS and Police scandals are all symptomatic of a shredded administrative and political class lacking in competence, integrity and either the ability to admit to or willingness to correct mistakes.
I found myself in disagreement with this paragraph.
But only because you forgot to mention education...
Do we need a British ENA, where instead of filling the national administration and top echelons of the civil service with people who have Mickey Mouse degrees such as PPE and Classics from Oxbridge we educate waves of competent students in a suitable mix of economics, law, politics, planning, business studies, sociology and most vitally ethics.
Give a large cadre of students the chance to get a degree that fast tracks them to the civil service or local government where they have been taught about what makes a country tick, what all the parts do, where tax revenue is made and how. Teach them about the benefits system and the justice system so they understand how it “works” and then they can properly think constructively about how it might be improved.
It can then be a badge where, when they are standing for election, they can show they actually have been taught about what they intend to do, a sort of electoral British Kite Mark.
That sounds great - the French system - but government by Enarques (eg Manny Macron) has led France to the brink of a Far Right government
Perhaps that is why Macron scrapped the ENA
Who says my long term goal with a British ENa isn’t to lead us to a far right government?
Only joking.
There were problems with the ENA in that it was quite socially rarefied and had the same domination as Oxbridge in the UK whereas I would want the British one to be a degree course, rather than a place, on offer at multiple universities around the UK to increase the breadth of applicants and product.
If it was solely in London like ENA in Paris then the cost of being a student in London would put off a lot of people whereas if it was on offer in universities in all the main Cities and big towns, and maybe it’s own blind entrance exam, then it could work.
I think the issue with EBA (and other grandes ecoles in France) is not so much the socially rarefied atmosphere but rather the typically French economic structure that harks back to the guilds and closed shops of the middle ages.
Just about every sector in France is protected by either regulatory or qualification barriers to entry. It's as true with plumbers or carpenters or waiters as it is with politicians or CEOs, and is also true of products (think wine appellations).
The aim is quality assurance, and it's certainly true the skilled tradesmen in France have much more formal training and are more closely regulated than their counterparts in the UK. It's much harder to be a cowboy, unless you operate in the grey economy.
That can be positive for the customer but it also brings problems: lack of choice and competition, idees fixes, producer-centric attitudes. A sort of 2-tier system where anyone not formally qualified is seen as little more than a petit bricoleur. All the result of a system that creates regulatory oligopoly.
The Anglo Saxon approach is more free-market and unregulated. But of course unregulated systems create monopolies and oligopolies too through force of money. Hence we get Oxbridge and the Ivy League. Informal closed shops rather than formal ones. But still easier to break into than the French official closed shops.
I am sure Cyclefree prefers the French system, regulate the cowboys out of existence. Plus also then add on jail anybody who has ever made or advised a wrong call in any organisation
People make mistakes all the time.
To err is human.
It's when you start lying to cover them up that the problems start. And then when you keep lying, and you allow innocent people to go to jail so you don't have to admit you made an error. Well, then I think it's just possible that the wrong people (you know, the ones who didn't make a "bad call") are the ones going to jail.
PRP & Just Culture are two instances of system designed so that screw ups are fixed, not punished.
I'm watching the Scottish Leaders debate on catchup. Wowsers. John Swinney is an unhappy chappy. Keeps being called out for all of the austerity and cuts his government have imposed. And the defence? "Westminster". He's a bit prickly!
He was awful! I hate to say it, but Lorna Slater was best, followed by Alex Cole-Hamilton. The audience had been chosen at random from the Glasgow Labour Party social club - after happy hour!
This was the big moment with the biggest applause. And reflects what we are hearing on the doors across Aberdeenshire:
It was shocking last night to actually see the bunch of dross that run Scotland. ACH an absolute FUD, Slater a deranged halfwit and the 3 stooges lying useless snakeoil barstewards. Combined brains of a donkey between the 5 of them, Scotland is as F**ked as the UK if not worse.
Worse. On the basis the North Sea oil industry is on terminal decline, as that becomes history, any chance of winning a Joxit Ref becomes history too. Does it not feel like a little golden period with a little golden chance has been squandered, and who knows if we shall ever see such opportunity ever again?
In that London for the day. Look: warm and blue skies! Also look: The ugliness of London's most important station is incomprehensible!
You've posted the wrong image, you wanted to post a picture of St Pancras station.
When I first took my wife to London, we had several transport options but in the end I went with arriving at St. Pancras.
Because of course you would, the place is absolutely stunning as opposed to the concrete monstrosities that pass for stations on either side of it.
Point of Order: King’s Cross is really nice now as well, they’ve junked all the crap at the front, added a modernist canopy which actually works and impresses - it links neatly to St Pancras
Possibly the best station complex in Europe or even the world
Next best terminals in london in order
Paddington Marylebone (it’s kinda cute) London Bridge (also much improved) Liverpool Street Charing X Victoria Waterloo
Excellent header; thanks. The repeated comment that I hear is that Britain's 'going to the dogs'. Or words to that effect. Now that may be partly due to my age, but as most of the people with whom I mix are generally optimistic types, I don't think so. Part of it is the ability of the Press to get "News" to everyone very rapidly. It's said that Good News travels fast, but in my experience Bad News travels even faster!
Milei is an intriguing rightwinger and proof that not all the populist right are the same:
"Argentina's President Javier Milei has approved a plan to send five Dassault Super-Étendard combat aircraft to Ukraine. This decision involves negotiating with France, the US, and NATO to bypass the British embargo preventing the use of these aircraft due to the Falklands War. The plan includes a potential swap with France, exchanging the Super Etendards for military equipment like drones or helicopters, with France handling the necessary upgrades to the aircraft."
I saw a Gillian Keegan interview - think it was Times Radio where she was asked about the civil service cuts.
Her answer to how many you're going to make redundant was something like, you don't need to make any one redundant, you have an employment freeze and then as people naturally leave you lower the head count that way.
No - that's not how anyone sensible does it. You look at what you do, what is it that don't add value or not enough value to the organisation. I bet that the civil service does stuff that made sense 10-20 years ago but doesn't anymore and we wouldn't miss, any organisation gathers cruft like that. That's where you make your savings. What you don't do is just let natural turnover produce random holes in the organisation and then spread the existing staff more thinly. Then as soon as you allow them to recruit again, you end up recruiting to the same posts and you're back where you started.
In that London for the day. Look: warm and blue skies! Also look: The ugliness of London's most important station is incomprehensible!
You've posted the wrong image, you wanted to post a picture of St Pancras station.
When I first took my wife to London, we had several transport options but in the end I went with arriving at St. Pancras.
Because of course you would, the place is absolutely stunning as opposed to the concrete monstrosities that pass for stations on either side of it.
Point of Order: King’s Cross is really nice now as well, they’ve junked all the crap at the front, added a modernist canopy which actually works and impresses - it links neatly to St Pancras
Possibly the best station complex in Europe or even the world
Next best terminals in london in order
Paddington Marylebone (it’s kinda cute) London Bridge (also much improved) Liverpool Street Charing X Victoria Waterloo
And way way way way down at the bottom
Euston
Are you high?
London Bridge may be "much improved", but it's still a total mess and only someone completely divorced from reality would regard it as better than ... say ... Waterloo.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too
Yes, because the Triple Lock has done nothing to increase taxes on workers.
Errr.
And the quadruple lock will do nothing to increase taxes on workers either. 🤦♂️
Freezing tax thresholds so those on unearned incomes paid more tax as a stealth tax, while workers got a tax cut via NI was a reasonable Hunt policy.
Sunak has found a way to completely undermine it. Now only workers have frozen tax thresholds, well done. 🤦♂️
Labour has not committed to match the Tory pledge to give those aged 67+ (soon to be 68+, with state pensionable ages increasing as night follows day) more favourable income tax treatment than any other group. It would be bizarre bordering on the criminal to discriminate thus as for the same income this group generally have far fewer financial commitments than any other group of the population (eg. mostly owner occupiers with much lower or zero mortgages, no kids to feed and childcare costs, no student loan additional 9% income tax, no NI contributions, no employees pension contributions to make). And to cap it all the rest of the population would also be paying for another dose of Trusseconomics as higher interest rates led to unaffordable escalating mortgage and rental costs, were those unfunded pledges ever to come to fruition.
The Secret Barrister made the point that somebody sexually assaulted today is likely to see the trial for that assault take place in 2029.
That's not good for anybody.
So many public services similarly trashed. Can anyone see an answer without additional spending and thus increased tax?
I don't think this is a problem money can solve. The Tories have been hosing money at stuff (particularly the NHS) without any perceptable improvement.
The reality is that we've been living wildly above our means for ages, and that we're now trapped under a mountain of debt created by this; after all the tax rises this Parliament, we're quite close to running a primary surplus, but the debt payments are crippling. There is very little scope to increase the tax take further, although there is scope to rebalance the tax system to be less logical.
It's a mess, the only possible long-term solution is cutting government tax and spending to get growth back, but that is going to involve slaying some very sacred cows.
The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too
Yes, because the Triple Lock has done nothing to increase taxes on workers.
Errr.
The triple lock is a self financing ponzi scheme now that more pensioners are paying tax than people in work
Rishi giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other
Well, if it could be managed, a politically clever way to end the Triple Lock (in effect) would be when the tax receipts from richer pensioners reach a level where they pay for the increases.
Good article, thanks Peter & Cycle. Depressing though - I have this recurring feeling nowadays that we are living during the period that will come to be known as the Fall of the West.
In some ways it's a blessing Mrs P. and I have no children, grandchildren etc. when I think of the prospect today's children are facing.
(Then again - I bet every generation has had similar thoughts at times, so cheer up BenPointer!)
It can be depressing, Ben. I have noticed the change in standards of administration and integrity in my lifetime, particularly in recent.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
Any thoughts as to when the rot began ?
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I think it began with the Beveridge report, actually.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
How many of the PO leadership were Oxbridge ?
Paula Vennells was University of Bradford Adam Crozier was Heriot-Watt
Though TBF many of the ministers who, as PtP points, out failed to take sufficient interest in the business they controlled were indeed Oxbridge.
Ed Davey went to Oxford.
You know, people say to me "the LibDems are not ready for government", and I say "look at Ed Davey": he's perfectly capable of fucking up every bit as badly as a Labour or Conservative minister.
In that London for the day. Look: warm and blue skies! Also look: The ugliness of London's most important station is incomprehensible!
You've posted the wrong image, you wanted to post a picture of St Pancras station.
When I first took my wife to London, we had several transport options but in the end I went with arriving at St. Pancras.
Because of course you would, the place is absolutely stunning as opposed to the concrete monstrosities that pass for stations on either side of it.
Point of Order: King’s Cross is really nice now as well, they’ve junked all the crap at the front, added a modernist canopy which actually works and impresses - it links neatly to St Pancras
Possibly the best station complex in Europe or even the world
Next best terminals in london in order
Paddington Marylebone (it’s kinda cute) London Bridge (also much improved) Liverpool Street Charing X Victoria Waterloo
And way way way way down at the bottom
Euston
Are you high?
London Bridge may be "much improved", but it's still a total mess and only someone completely divorced from reality would regard it as better than ... say ... Waterloo.
The best thing about Victoria is Wetherspoons, that’s how bad it is.
Comments
Solidarity with the Firestick Robin Hoods.
Because of course you would, the place is absolutely stunning as opposed to the concrete monstrosities that pass for stations on either side of it.
It is a problem, and it transcends party politics. Tough one for succeeding generations, I agree.
I’m not usually one to demand heads roll for scandals, but I make exceptions for the Post Office and for those who covered up the grooming gangs.
There’s more than a decade of PO senior management who conspired to cover up this scandal, and their victims deserve to see them in court.
Mayor of Nice in the shit for moving by 1 day a 15,000 participant cycling event to accommodate the election.
I learned the other day the concept of the “personality hire”. An employee who is taken on largely because of their social skills, extroversion, emotional intelligence, good humour and charm - and thus their ability to lift spirits in an office, make people smile, smooth out frictions with wit and grace - and thus get them back to work
In a way, the office of Prime Minister is the biggest “personality hire” of all
Neither Sunak nor Brown has the personality. Nor did truss or May. Boris definitely did but had huge flaws otherwise which doomed him. Cameron nearly made it but was too arrogant and vain.
Probably Blair is the last PM with the full skill set
Don't get Ms C started on this one. She's even more vitriolic than I am, and that's saying something. (And of course, she is a lawyer.)
However there is nothing remotely facile about some of those things you mentioned. NIMBYism in particular is a major blight on this country, whatever your priorities are for investment.
Whether it be more houses you want or flats, more roads or more rails or more cycle paths, more wind turbines or power pylons or phone masts or anything else invested in at all really, NIMBYism and related BANANAism means that investments cost far more than they should, take far longer than they should, and result in far less happening due to investment.
Which in turn results in less productivity.
I have a theory that it was the fall of Soviet communism which began the change as those at the top now thought that history had ended, there were no more threats and they could do as they wanted.
I see that old chestnut "public sector productivity" has reared its ugly head this morning.
Once we've all got past defining it, the truth is reducing operational costs does not improve productivity, if anything, it makes the situation worse. Has closing operational sector offices in London made the Met more productive? No, because officers take much longer now with suspects as they have to take them further so they are not on patrol.
Is giving an adult or child social worker an extra 10 cases going to make them more productive? Obviously not. Is adding extra clients to domiciliary care teams going to make them more productive? Obviously not.
That's the problem - a mentality which sees the cost of everything and the value of nothing and that was the fundamental flaw with the so-called austerity of 2010 and beyond. Instead of trying to make public services work (and that involves the private sector) it became all about the cost of those services and this was compounded by the fact large parts of the public services were insulated from any reform as a deliberate political act.
Here in Newham we have a big problem with rubbish - lots of people living closely together in an urban environment spawns rubbish. They've changed the collection days (fair enough) but are insisting residents bring their bins to the edge of their property before collection (apparently the "productivity" of the collectors is reduced if they have to gon into a property and bring the bin to the vehicle). That's fine for those who can move full bins of rubbish but some elderly people cannot so immediately the productivity "gain" is compromised.
Unfortunately the Party which has led Government since 2010 is focussed on the cost of services not the quality of the provision and all you end up with is a death s[piral of decline. To break out of that needs a complete redefinition of what public services are or should be and a proper debate with the public (we all use public services to some degree) as to what kind of Services we want and how much we are willing to pay for those Services.
Possibly the best station complex in Europe or even the world
Next best terminals in london in order
Paddington
Marylebone (it’s kinda cute)
London Bridge (also much improved)
Liverpool Street
Charing X
Victoria
Waterloo
And way way way way down at the bottom
Euston
It is abundantly clear that the #NU10K believe that the consequences are something that happen to other people.
Unless the consequences are pay rises and promotions.
They also believe that not knowing anything about what their organisation does is a natural state for management.
All of which reminds me of the reaction I got when questioning a politician at a garden party.
It led to, in Jay's words, the belief 'the man in Whitehall really does know best.'
In this they were wrong, because most of them had limited life experience and being trained in an Oxbridge system that prized rhetoric above in depth analysis lacked the intellectual curiosity or personal humility to note their own ignorance and correct it.
But that arrogance is responsible for many disasters. Including the Post Office, indeed, because they thought they knew better than the people working the system and all the evidence to the contrary had to be ruthlessly suppressed.
The tragedy is in many cases they mean well. (Not necessarily at the PO.)
I actually think Sunak has been stitched up by the release of a clip that wouldn’t ordinarily see the light of day. I still think that he should have done the event he skipped but this doesn’t make the situation worse for me. He was clearly a bit behind schedule and was explaining why, he wasn’t dissing anyone.
I also think that we can’t complain that politicians are always in political mode if journalists are going to play gotcha with clips like this. Unfortunately mostly our instincts are to absolutely put the boot into a man when he’s down, I’m sure I’ve succumbed in my time, but the world might be a slightly better place if we resisted a little more.
1983 Breakfast TV
1986 Late night TV
1988 Morning TV
You tell that to the young people of today ...
On the one hand, there are the "35ers" - those who have Conservative plus Reform at or around 35 which can means anything from 25-10 through 20-15 to 18-17 and the "39ers" which are Focaldata and JL Partners which have 24-15 as the split.
The Lab/LD/Green split is more consistent - between 56 (Focaldata) and 61 (YouGov).
In December 2019, the split was 48-47 so if it's now 35-60 that's a 13% move across the two blocs.
I didn't used to believe this, but have learned otherwise, in large part from Mrs PtP and Ms C.
(Dons flameproof coat)
But I'd also take a contrary view: there is much in this country that does work. Yes, there are failures - far too many, in fact. Yes, things are under an increasing strain that needs relieving - somehow. Yet when things work, as they do the vast majority of the time, it is not noticed. When my son was ill recently, the experience with all levels of the NHS was brilliant. A friend's unusual and non-straightforward issue was sorted out by the council speedily and compassionately. Things often work well.
The failures are all too noticeable, and often hideous. However I'm unsure that they are more widespread than they used to be, or even more egregious - perhaps it is now much easier for these things to come, eventually and belatedly, into the public domain. I'm very unsure the Post Office scandal is anywhere near unique in British history.
I don't want this to sound complacent; as I said, there are too many failures, and a reluctance to hold people to account for them, and/or learn lessons. But neither is right to think of Britain as a failed state. We're not.
It's just that we can - and must - do better.
The chances of that sexual assault making it to trial is probably less than 10%.
Oh, no, I forgot. The entire Tory strategy is to pretend that they have not been the government for the past 14 years.
He takes great pleasure in mocking the public school / oxbridge members in Atlee's government.
I know which approach I'd prefer.
So someone throw objects at a man, which said man to threaten Nigel Farage?
He hated it. So it was never an option that we would be sent to private school. My parents probably could have afforded it, and it probably would have involved doing without a lot of things (though we never had Sky anyway).
I really think the sneering at Sunak for talking about going without Sky is wrongheaded. In general, Britain needs to learn the lesson of delayed gratification. Of investing money in the present in return for a payoff in the future, instead of a financial shortcut to get a payoff in the present at the expense of higher costs in the future.
If you wanted a succinct explanation of where Britain has gone wrong over the last few decades, and what it needs to do to correct things, that's it.
As soon as anyone tries to talk about anything in those terms they are hit with a barrage of sneering.
We have plenty of money. It's simply being siphoned off everywhere due to kleptocracy.
There are two ways to do that.
1: Stop trying to prevent growth from happening - cf. NIMBYism.
2: Invest in that which can allow growth to happen.
Too many people actively want to prevent growth from happening. We see it all the time in complaints from "it will spoil my view" through to "it will induce demand" (another term for induced demand is growth).
https://x.com/akurkov/status/1800795876249809083?s=61
* This is entirely true.
One Man. One Vote.
EDIT: Opinion polls will be 100% accurate. Always.
'Boys ask teachers how to strangle girls during sex.'
OK, so the subject matter on its own is disturbing enough, but somebody should really have checked the phrasing as it made it worse.
https://x.com/Cycling_In_LDN/status/1798784363725046171
The causes of the scandal are many and various but no-one can dispute that the failureof the sole shareholder, the Government, to hold the organisation properly to account was a majorfactor. That is something that can be addressed right now in respect of all Government owned businessed, and at precious little cost.
It's too late for the PO, but others could benefit from an acceptance by politicians that they are responsible for enduring proper accountability of such bodies.
It is after one very good reason why we elect them.
I like a lot of your comments on here but you’re better than tory puff posts
I still recall the comic horror when a parent at the Free School suggested we use some of the piles of money we were accumulating in the PTA fund to top up teachers pay - lots of ex private school parents who thought that buying £250 of raffle tickets was how things rolled.
As you know I strongly support in investing in the Dutch policies of consistently building new roads and cycle paths and believe doing so creates the conditions for both better growth and standards of living.
If we had Dutch levels of roads and cycle paths then both our roads and our cycling would be much better, we'd be more productive and have more demand.
Adam Crozier was Heriot-Watt
I can understand the older cyclist being a bit startled by sudden appearance of the car (but should really be anticipating cars looking to exit driveways) but the driver has not, as far as I can see, done anything wrong really or caused any danger.
"For those of you with Black and white TVs the brown ball is behind the yellow"
Framing things as "look how much worse we could be" is a recipe for inaction.
The goal of policy should be to improve our lives, not to tell us how good we have it.
Except we know that Nord Stream was done by the Ukrainians. The New York Times even published their names, and even the name of the boat they used.
Unless you live abroad, or have an internet. An anomoly that I’m amazed they haven’t yet fixed.
It is very much like that here. On the one hand it is paradisical - perfect weather, beautiful city, laughing young people, everyone REALLY keen to have a good time, on the other hand there is a terrible war on, the drones come at night, men hobble around on crutches
The highs and lows are equally intense
Taxes are going up whoever wins we just dont know by how much.
Errr.
Perhaps PBers would like to donate?
https://www.gofundme.com/f/IslingtonPoll
Rishi giveth with one hand and taketh away with the other
Freezing tax thresholds so those on unearned incomes paid more tax as a stealth tax, while workers got a tax cut via NI was a reasonable Hunt policy.
Sunak has found a way to completely undermine it. Now only workers have frozen tax thresholds, well done. 🤦♂️
*is it a legal requirement to have lights on a dedicated, lit, cycle path?
'The only chance of cutting tax and spending is the re election of a Sunak Tory government.
A landslide majority for Starmer Labour will almost certainly see taxes increase and gradually increase spending then further too.’
… is a puff post
Not going to work. You can't run that from power.
The piece is about 95% Cyclefree. I top and tailed an email she sent me recently, but mostly it appears verbatim. Naturally I agree with everything she says here and am delighted to be associated with such an authority on the subject.
There is much more to said, particularly in respect of the points you make, but I will come back to them shortly. I didn't know the piece was going up this morning and was surprised to find it there when I came back from walking the dogs. I want to respond to each of those who have been good enough to express their views.
Ms C is very busy these days and I am not sure if she is able to respond directly herself, but in her absence I think I can answer most points without misrepresenting either of us.
A record high level of taxation on working people
Sunak, as Chancellor, presided over a huge rise in borrowing, yes, some of it to cover the economic damage of the pandemic. He's also presided over stealth tax rises by freezing thresholds which has brought more people into higher rate taxation.
@Leon said the Government should have implemented a one-off Pandemic tax to recoup the losses - a classic example of the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away but not an unreasonable suggestion as perhaps trying to raise £100 billion to offset the borrowings on a one-off basis wouldn't have been popular but would have left us in a better position than we face now.
The "answer", if there is one, and there isn't just one, is to look at the forms of wealth. Windows were taxed once so taxing land value isn't the worst idea.
The other side of the answer is cultural and political - the notion we can have a low tax, high quality service economy just doesn't fly (it might do in some parts of the world). IF we want high quality services we will have to accept levels of personal taxation which make the current levels look mild. IF we want to pay less tax, someone has to spell out what will mean for service provision at the most basic level.
@another_richard won't like it but it is about reforming local Government but less the structures than how those structures are funded with much more being raised locally via differential Council Tax rates and more bands. It's politically nasty but if you are a Government with a majority of 200+ you have the opportunity to take those risks and have that debate.
To err is human.
It's when you start lying to cover them up that the problems start. And then when you keep lying, and you allow innocent people to go to jail so you don't have to admit you made an error. Well, then I think it's just possible that the wrong people (you know, the ones who didn't make a "bad call") are the ones going to jail.
With a full ballot prompt, we are seeing the initial effects of tactical voting. Asked the direct question. a plurality say they would"
"Would you or would you not vote for a party that was not your first choice in order to stop a party that you dislike from winning?"
Would - 45%
Would not - 43%
Don’t know - 12%
45% are prepared to vote for a party which is not their first choice, if it meant denying a party they did not like from winning. We see evidence of this in the voting intention figures too, where 38% of 2019 Lib Dem voters say they intend to vote Labour, as do 9% of Green voters. 6% of Labour 2019 voters say they will vote Green, 5% for the Lib Dems.
Pandora's box has been opened, the blackout doesn't exist anymore, you can't prevent people watching the games live if they have access to the internet - so all it does is make people do so illegally.
Was there an impact of the traditional rush to recruit 2.1s or above from "top" universites, and drive them hard?
Are we being impacted by the consequences of a folk-belief in the effectiveness of generalised, context-free management techniques?
(Speculating)
Excellent header; thanks.
The repeated comment that I hear is that Britain's 'going to the dogs'. Or words to that effect. Now that may be partly due to my age, but as most of the people with whom I mix are generally optimistic types, I don't think so.
Part of it is the ability of the Press to get "News" to everyone very rapidly. It's said that Good News travels fast, but in my experience Bad News travels even faster!
"Argentina's President Javier Milei has approved a plan to send five Dassault Super-Étendard combat aircraft to Ukraine. This decision involves negotiating with France, the US, and NATO to bypass the British embargo preventing the use of these aircraft due to the Falklands War. The plan includes a potential swap with France, exchanging the Super Etendards for military equipment like drones or helicopters, with France handling the necessary upgrades to the aircraft."
https://x.com/NOELreports/status/1800818271257559229
Though given Argentina's recent economic performance and balance of trade I assume they'll want to be paid for this.
Her answer to how many you're going to make redundant was something like, you don't need to make any one redundant, you have an employment freeze and then as people naturally leave you lower the head count that way.
No - that's not how anyone sensible does it. You look at what you do, what is it that don't add value or not enough value to the organisation. I bet that the civil service does stuff that made sense 10-20 years ago but doesn't anymore and we wouldn't miss, any organisation gathers cruft like that. That's where you make your savings. What you don't do is just let natural turnover produce random holes in the organisation and then spread the existing staff more thinly. Then as soon as you allow them to recruit again, you end up recruiting to the same posts and you're back where you started.
London Bridge may be "much improved", but it's still a total mess and only someone completely divorced from reality would regard it as better than ... say ... Waterloo.
Not sure that is actually possible, but hey...
I mean it may be right not an outlier but 23% to LibDem-Green is iirc higher than any other poll this parliament by a country mile.
There's something not quite right about that poll