Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
As an expert witness?
Undoubtedly.
Although when asked I may blame it all on Lord Finklestein.
There is one certainty in life, I would not do well in prison.
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
Mr Brown said: "I will not allow house prices to get out of control and put at risk the sustainability of the future." He said he was determined that the UK should not return to the "instability, speculation and negative equity" of the 1980s and 1990s.
@BethRigby Betting scandal crisis deepens: Many more people than Tories already identified being investigated by gambling regulator re bets on election date. Watchdog widened inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked third party to place bet
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
As an expert witness?
Undoubtedly.
Although when asked I may blame it all on Lord Finklestein.
There is one certainty in life, I would not do well in prison.
@BethRigby Betting scandal crisis deepens: Many more people than Tories already identified being investigated by gambling regulator re bets on election date. Watchdog widened inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked third party to place bet
@BethRigby Betting scandal crisis deepens: Many more people than Tories already identified being investigated by gambling regulator re bets on election date. Watchdog widened inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked third party to place bet
@BethRigby Betting scandal crisis deepens: Many more people than Tories already identified being investigated by gambling regulator re bets on election date. Watchdog widened inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked third party to place bet
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
Those who bet before 21st May will probably be fine; those who bet on 21st will probably face a fine:
Fine for what by whom? You can't just fine people just because you are a Commission. Did Magna Carta die for nothing?
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
As an expert witness?
Undoubtedly.
Although when asked I may blame it all on Lord Finklestein.
There is one certainty in life, I would not do well in prison.
I have the same problem of being too attractive.
I had a client who ended up in prison and he told me about his experiences.
He went to court in his best suit, shoes, and Rolex and ended up in prison with those.
His suit was taken from him and he was given prison clothes, so there he was wearing expensive shoes and a Rolex.
All the prisoners kept on asking him for money to help out their families etc.
@BethRigby Betting scandal crisis deepens: Many more people than Tories already identified being investigated by gambling regulator re bets on election date. Watchdog widened inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked third party to place bet
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
As an expert witness?
Undoubtedly.
Although when asked I may blame it all on Lord Finklestein.
There is one certainty in life, I would not do well in prison.
There is always a stench when Mandleson is involved in anything.
Mandelson is a class act. One of the finest political brains of the modern era.
1992. Labour ahead in the polls. Soap box. Sheffield. Tory victory. That's why Mandelson is cautious, and also why I do not believe Mandelson is an electoral wunderkind.
Kinnock never thought Labour would win in 1992.
Because whatever the polls say, winning a majority when you go in with 229 seats, as Kinnock did, is tough.
Winning a majority when you only had 202 seats in the last election is tougher.
People are strange creatures and an incumbent often has a stickyness that makes the difference, plus there are plenty of Big Gs out there and plenty of left wing BJOs who are appalled at SKS treachery from Corbyns true path and will vote Green.
I would not be at all surprised if Labour have an uncomfortably small majority or none. Despite the Tories best efforts.
Plus the Reformgasm is a nightmare for pollsters who can not rely on previous demographic behaviour with a new major player on the block.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
Those who bet before 21st May will probably be fine; those who bet on 21st will probably face a fine:
Fine for what by whom? You can't just fine people just because you are a Commission. Did Magna Carta die for nothing?
Ffs I nearly put a *comment in that post but then decided no one would be stupid enough to confuse a bit of wordplay with an actual proposal. I clearly overunderestimated.
(*To the effect that I wasn't seriously suggesting there will be fines.)
Paris aside, on each of my recent visits to France - and I’ve been all over - Brittany, Normandy, Picardy, the Cevennes, Provence, Languedoc - I’ve been struck by the high quality of life. It’s not just the nicer weather - they have good health care, beautiful cities, agreeable food, excellent infrastructure, lots of holidays
They must have one of the highest “qualities of life” in the world. And I’m not just comparing them with fucked up old Britain. They seem to have a superior quality of life to almost anyone in europe (or the world?)
Yes they have problems - migration, crime, but still. Other countries have all that as well and often far worse
Yet the French are so discontented they are voting in their millions for a woman who says France is on the brink of ruin and forget about my Nazi dad only I can save you
WHY?
I’m around now and on the way to the greengrocers.
Good question. Statistically they aren’t doing that badly either. Their most deprived areas are nowhere near as deprived as the worst in Europe, and the average square mile of land in France is almost as pretty as the average square mile of Italy, but with things working more smoothly. Their birth rate is higher than most suggesting household optimism is holding up. But they are grumpy and discontented as hell.
I know many have tried to answer. I have a theory: France, like the French language, is a closed concept with rules. Other cultures - not all - are open source.
The French seem to assess their lives against a canonical notion of France and Frenchness. That involves the supremacy of the country’s constitution and history, its language, its wine, its social fabric. France must be the pinnacle or it is nothing. They find it wanting against this overly tough benchmark.
French is losing influence around the world because of its inflexibility. You don’t want a lingua Franca that you’re going to get constantly corrected on by the natives. French food and drink has also lost ground because of its inflexibility. France hasn’t integrated its migrant populations anywhere near as successfully as Britain because of the same fixed notion of integration that involves a migrant becoming canonically French.
So the people are grumpy. It’s as if France itself is held in an appellation controllee. It’s part of what makes it so charming to me but it means modern life will always be a disappointment.
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
I too like graphs. Shall we do waiting lists?
How about number of NHS employees ?
For the long term trend of NHS employment:
The statistics show how the NHS workforce has grown and evolved over the past seven decades:
In 1949, there were 11,735 full time equivalent hospital doctors in England and Wales, including 3,488 consultants. By 2018 there were 109,509 full time equivalent medical and dental staff, including 46,297 consultants, in England.
In 1949, there were 68,013 registered nurses in hospitals in England and Wales. In 2018, that number stood at 320,422 (headcount).
There were 5,637 midwifery staff in 1949. By 2018 there were 26,519 (headcount).
In 1963 there were 22,159 GPs in England and Wales, 19,951 of whom were male and 2,208 of whom were female. In 2018 there were 41,693 GPs, 17,366 male and 21,736 female (headcount).
How much has the country benefitted from all this ?
There's been increases in life expectancy since 1948 but most (almost all ?) of that has been from other changes such as reductions in smoking and health destroying jobs.
Has the NHS now become a 'self licking ice cream' where its purpose is to keep sick oldies alive for a few more months which thereby creates more work for the NHS ?
How much taxpayers money is now being spent per each decile of human life ?
And how much benefit does that bring to individuals and the country generally ?
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
Those who bet before 21st May will probably be fine; those who bet on 21st will probably face a fine:
Fine for what by whom? You can't just fine people just because you are a Commission. Did Magna Carta die for nothing?
Ffs I nearly put a *comment in that post but then decided no one would be stupid enough to confuse a bit of wordplay with an actual proposal. I clearly overunderestimated.
(*To the effect that I wasn't seriously suggesting there will be fines.)
More seriously though, what law or regulation has been broken?
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
Sunak is such an irksome goody two shoes, what with raising the duty on port and age related smoking bans, it is particularly pleasing that gambling has been his downfall
There is always a stench when Mandleson is involved in anything.
Mandelson is a class act. One of the finest political brains of the modern era.
1992. Labour ahead in the polls. Soap box. Sheffield. Tory victory. That's why Mandelson is cautious, and also why I do not believe Mandelson is an electoral wunderkind.
Kinnock never thought Labour would win in 1992.
Because whatever the polls say, winning a majority when you go in with 229 seats, as Kinnock did, is tough.
Winning a majority when you only had 202 seats in the last election is tougher.
People are strange creatures and an incumbent often has a stickyness that makes the difference, plus there are plenty of Big Gs out there and plenty of left wing BJOs who are appalled at SKS treachery from Corbyns true path and will vote Green.
I would not be at all surprised if Labour have an uncomfortably small majority or none. Despite the Tories best efforts.
Plus the Reformgasm is a nightmare for pollsters who can not rely on previous demographic behaviour with a new major player on the block.
However LAB only got 150 in 1935 but got nearly 400 in 1945.
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
Tell that to the hundreds of thousand dead and maimed Iraqis we helped cause.
Whatever else you can lay at the door of this Government, nothing - and I mean NOTHING - will ever come close to that obscenity from your "greatest government".
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
Those who bet before 21st May will probably be fine; those who bet on 21st will probably face a fine:
Fine for what by whom? You can't just fine people just because you are a Commission. Did Magna Carta die for nothing?
Ffs I nearly put a *comment in that post but then decided no one would be stupid enough to confuse a bit of wordplay with an actual proposal. I clearly overunderestimated.
(*To the effect that I wasn't seriously suggesting there will be fines.)
Ah ok sorry. I have just cycled 113 kilometres and I am not firing on all cylinders
Paris aside, on each of my recent visits to France - and I’ve been all over - Brittany, Normandy, Picardy, the Cevennes, Provence, Languedoc - I’ve been struck by the high quality of life. It’s not just the nicer weather - they have good health care, beautiful cities, agreeable food, excellent infrastructure, lots of holidays
They must have one of the highest “qualities of life” in the world. And I’m not just comparing them with fucked up old Britain. They seem to have a superior quality of life to almost anyone in europe (or the world?)
Yes they have problems - migration, crime, but still. Other countries have all that as well and often far worse
Yet the French are so discontented they are voting in their millions for a woman who says France is on the brink of ruin and forget about my Nazi dad only I can save you
WHY?
I’m around now and on the way to the greengrocers.
Good question. Statistically they aren’t doing that badly either. Their most deprived areas are nowhere near as deprived as the worst in Europe, and the average square mile of land in France is almost as pretty as the average square mile of Italy, but with things working more smoothly. Their birth rate is higher than most suggesting household optimism is holding up. But they are grumpy and discontented as hell.
I know many have tried to answer. I have a theory: France, like the French language, is a closed concept with rules. Other cultures - not all - are open source.
The French seem to assess their lives against a canonical notion of France and Frenchness. That involves the supremacy of the country’s constitution and history, its language, its wine, its social fabric. France must be the pinnacle or it is nothing. They find it wanting against this overly tough benchmark.
French is losing influence around the world because of its inflexibility. You don’t want a lingua Franca that you’re going to get constantly corrected on by the natives. French food and drink has also lost ground because of its inflexibility. France hasn’t integrated its migrant populations anywhere near as successfully as Britain because of the same fixed notion of integration that involves a migrant becoming canonically French.
So the people are grumpy. It’s as if France itself is held in an appellation controllee. It’s part of what makes it so charming to me but it means modern life will always be a disappointment.
Isn't it just inflation of expectation, a bit like America and indeed the UK too?
People bank the gains and soon forget, and it just fuels the demand for more as material desires can never be satisfied.
@BethRigby Betting scandal crisis deepens: Many more people than Tories already identified being investigated by gambling regulator re bets on election date. Watchdog widened inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked third party to place bet
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
I too like graphs. Shall we do waiting lists?
How about number of NHS employees ?
For the long term trend of NHS employment:
The statistics show how the NHS workforce has grown and evolved over the past seven decades:
In 1949, there were 11,735 full time equivalent hospital doctors in England and Wales, including 3,488 consultants. By 2018 there were 109,509 full time equivalent medical and dental staff, including 46,297 consultants, in England.
In 1949, there were 68,013 registered nurses in hospitals in England and Wales. In 2018, that number stood at 320,422 (headcount).
There were 5,637 midwifery staff in 1949. By 2018 there were 26,519 (headcount).
In 1963 there were 22,159 GPs in England and Wales, 19,951 of whom were male and 2,208 of whom were female. In 2018 there were 41,693 GPs, 17,366 male and 21,736 female (headcount).
How much has the country benefitted from all this ?
There's been increases in life expectancy since 1948 but most (almost all ?) of that has been from other changes such as reductions in smoking and health destroying jobs.
Has the NHS now become a 'self licking ice cream' where its purpose is to keep sick oldies alive for a few more months which thereby creates more work for the NHS ?
How much taxpayers money is now being spent per each decile of human life ?
And how much benefit does that bring to individuals and the country generally ?
Why not see how many votes 'cutting the NHS' gets?
Here's the thing. Over the long-term the Standard of Living increases*. What do we spend that extra wealth on? Should we all have more 'stuff', or more money stashed away in savings, or more food or drink maybe?
Or should we spend that extra wealth on things like health, education, culture, national infrastructure, security? Things that improve the people's quality of life?
I know which I would rather have.
(*Except when we have 14 years of incompetent Tory government, it seems.)
There are not many people from the pre-2010 days still around and meaningfully active at a senior level to try to get back into relevance under a Starmer government, so the few that are will be heard from a lot.
I make it around 60 elected in 2005 or earlier from the current crop - some of whom are standing down of course.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
Those who bet before 21st May will probably be fine; those who bet on 21st will probably face a fine:
Fine for what by whom? You can't just fine people just because you are a Commission. Did Magna Carta die for nothing?
Ffs I nearly put a *comment in that post but then decided no one would be stupid enough to confuse a bit of wordplay with an actual proposal. I clearly overunderestimated.
(*To the effect that I wasn't seriously suggesting there will be fines.)
Ah ok sorry. I have just cycled 113 kilometres and I am not firing on all cylinders
Now I feel bad!
Well done on the 113km. Time for a beer or two, maybe?
As an American, I would like to say that having an election on July 4th is - however intentionally - sporting of you. That date choice reminds me of the Canadian band that came down to march in our 4th of July parade a few years ago.
It's not a big deal, but Hunt's use of "the wife" is archaic. For reference, would a woman ever say "got the husband's vote"? Probably not - it would be "my".
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
Mr Brown said: "I will not allow house prices to get out of control and put at risk the sustainability of the future." He said he was determined that the UK should not return to the "instability, speculation and negative equity" of the 1980s and 1990s.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
No you muppet, why would they investigate you? You've clearly done nothing wrong. I was obviously saying the idea that they investigate you is "bile".
You need to get off that high horse of yours. I know you think everything I post is rubbish and you'd much rather I wasn't here but even when trying to defend you, you respond this way. It's not a good look, it comes across super rude and condescending, I have never met you (and don't ever plan to) but I hope you aren't like this in real life.
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
I too like graphs. Shall we do waiting lists?
How about number of NHS employees ?
For the long term trend of NHS employment:
The statistics show how the NHS workforce has grown and evolved over the past seven decades:
In 1949, there were 11,735 full time equivalent hospital doctors in England and Wales, including 3,488 consultants. By 2018 there were 109,509 full time equivalent medical and dental staff, including 46,297 consultants, in England.
In 1949, there were 68,013 registered nurses in hospitals in England and Wales. In 2018, that number stood at 320,422 (headcount).
There were 5,637 midwifery staff in 1949. By 2018 there were 26,519 (headcount).
In 1963 there were 22,159 GPs in England and Wales, 19,951 of whom were male and 2,208 of whom were female. In 2018 there were 41,693 GPs, 17,366 male and 21,736 female (headcount).
How much has the country benefitted from all this ?
There's been increases in life expectancy since 1948 but most (almost all ?) of that has been from other changes such as reductions in smoking and health destroying jobs.
Has the NHS now become a 'self licking ice cream' where its purpose is to keep sick oldies alive for a few more months which thereby creates more work for the NHS ?
How much taxpayers money is now being spent per each decile of human life ?
And how much benefit does that bring to individuals and the country generally ?
Why not see how many votes 'cutting the NHS' gets?
Here's the thing. Over the long-term the Standard of Living increases*. What do we spend that extra wealth on? Should we all have more 'stuff', or more money stashed away in savings, or more food or drink maybe?
Or should we spend that extra wealth on things like health, education, culture, national infrastructure, security? Things that improve the people's quality of life?
I know which I would rather have.
(*Except when we have 14 years of incompetent Tory government, it seems.)
I think it also demonstrates how woeful the last 14 years of management by the DoH has been that all the extra money and staff have been squandered for so little impact.
Not that I think Streeting will do much better. Indeed it is likely to end his political ambitions. No minister of Health has made PM since the NHS came into being.
There is always a stench when Mandleson is involved in anything.
Mandelson is a class act. One of the finest political brains of the modern era.
1992. Labour ahead in the polls. Soap box. Sheffield. Tory victory. That's why Mandelson is cautious, and also why I do not believe Mandelson is an electoral wunderkind.
Kinnock never thought Labour would win in 1992.
Because whatever the polls say, winning a majority when you go in with 229 seats, as Kinnock did, is tough.
Winning a majority when you only had 202 seats in the last election is tougher.
People are strange creatures and an incumbent often has a stickyness that makes the difference, plus there are plenty of Big Gs out there and plenty of left wing BJOs who are appalled at SKS treachery from Corbyns true path and will vote Green.
I would not be at all surprised if Labour have an uncomfortably small majority or none. Despite the Tories best efforts.
Plus the Reformgasm is a nightmare for pollsters who can not rely on previous demographic behaviour with a new major player on the block.
However LAB only got 150 in 1935 but got nearly 400 in 1945.
They had been in power in a National Coalition since 1939 though, with Churchill leading Foreign Affairs and Labour given a fairly free hand in home affairs.
There is always a stench when Mandleson is involved in anything.
Mandelson is a class act. One of the finest political brains of the modern era.
1992. Labour ahead in the polls. Soap box. Sheffield. Tory victory. That's why Mandelson is cautious, and also why I do not believe Mandelson is an electoral wunderkind.
Kinnock never thought Labour would win in 1992.
Because whatever the polls say, winning a majority when you go in with 229 seats, as Kinnock did, is tough.
Winning a majority when you only had 202 seats in the last election is tougher.
People are strange creatures and an incumbent often has a stickyness that makes the difference, plus there are plenty of Big Gs out there and plenty of left wing BJOs who are appalled at SKS treachery from Corbyns true path and will vote Green.
I would not be at all surprised if Labour have an uncomfortably small majority or none. Despite the Tories best efforts.
Plus the Reformgasm is a nightmare for pollsters who can not rely on previous demographic behaviour with a new major player on the block.
I mean, there are these things called betting markets. And those generous chaps at Betfair will offer you 29 times your stake, if you are right. It’s a wonder you aren’t out getting every penny that’s available.
Paris aside, on each of my recent visits to France - and I’ve been all over - Brittany, Normandy, Picardy, the Cevennes, Provence, Languedoc - I’ve been struck by the high quality of life. It’s not just the nicer weather - they have good health care, beautiful cities, agreeable food, excellent infrastructure, lots of holidays
They must have one of the highest “qualities of life” in the world. And I’m not just comparing them with fucked up old Britain. They seem to have a superior quality of life to almost anyone in europe (or the world?)
Yes they have problems - migration, crime, but still. Other countries have all that as well and often far worse
Yet the French are so discontented they are voting in their millions for a woman who says France is on the brink of ruin and forget about my Nazi dad only I can save you
WHY?
I’m around now and on the way to the greengrocers.
Good question. Statistically they aren’t doing that badly either. Their most deprived areas are nowhere near as deprived as the worst in Europe, and the average square mile of land in France is almost as pretty as the average square mile of Italy, but with things working more smoothly. Their birth rate is higher than most suggesting household optimism is holding up. But they are grumpy and discontented as hell.
I know many have tried to answer. I have a theory: France, like the French language, is a closed concept with rules. Other cultures - not all - are open source.
The French seem to assess their lives against a canonical notion of France and Frenchness. That involves the supremacy of the country’s constitution and history, its language, its wine, its social fabric. France must be the pinnacle or it is nothing. They find it wanting against this overly tough benchmark.
French is losing influence around the world because of its inflexibility. You don’t want a lingua Franca that you’re going to get constantly corrected on by the natives. French food and drink has also lost ground because of its inflexibility. France hasn’t integrated its migrant populations anywhere near as successfully as Britain because of the same fixed notion of integration that involves a migrant becoming canonically French.
So the people are grumpy. It’s as if France itself is held in an appellation controllee. It’s part of what makes it so charming to me but it means modern life will always be a disappointment.
Isn't it just inflation of expectation, a bit like America and indeed the UK too?
People bank the gains and soon forget, and it just fuels the demand for more as material desires can never be satisfied.
That’s one way to describe it, but I would say it is of a different sort. America and Britain want to be great, the best, world leading, and their people get cross when they’re not (or even, in the USA’s case, when they are). But France requires itself to be the best in a very specific way.
Let’s return to the appellation contrôlée example. An American wine wants to win the best in class trophy or get 98 from Robert Parker. A French wine wants to exhibit “typicity”. Before it can think of winning anything it first must prove it is precisely as you would expect of a wine from that slope in that region.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
No you muppet, why would they investigate you? You've clearly done nothing wrong. I was obviously saying the idea that they investigate you is "bile".
You need to get off that high horse of yours. I know you think everything I post is rubbish and you'd much rather I wasn't here but even when trying to defend you, you respond this way. It's not a good look, it comes across super rude and condescending, I have never met you (and don't ever plan to) but I hope you aren't like this in real life.
Enough.
Because I know some people at the top of the Tory party, past and present.
I regularly discuss the betting markets with some of these people.
My day job I have regular enhanced DBS checks and credit checks, I really do not need the hassle because some people have been acting ethically dubious.
As an American, I would like to say that having an election on July 4th is - however intentionally - sporting of you. That date choice reminds me of the Canadian band that came down to march in our 4th of July parade a few years ago.
A July 4th Election in which the UK IndependenceBrexit Reform Party are mounting an insurgency raid on the establishment is quite ironic.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
I'm far from convinced any of this is within the definition of "cheating" in the Gambling Act at all. But even if that's made out, a friend of a friend chancing pin money based on a rumour clearly isn't - it's the run of the mill information asymmetry on which betting is based ("I spoke to the trainer and he says Fat Bob is running well, so 10-1 is a steal").
The Gambling Commission has taken leave of its senses, in my view. It is making a very narrow matter very wide just because it's made headlines rather than on the basis of a robust legal interpretation and sober assessment of what is proportionate to the alleged harm.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
No you muppet, why would they investigate you? You've clearly done nothing wrong. I was obviously saying the idea that they investigate you is "bile".
You need to get off that high horse of yours. I know you think everything I post is rubbish and you'd much rather I wasn't here but even when trying to defend you, you respond this way. It's not a good look, it comes across super rude and condescending, I have never met you (and don't ever plan to) but I hope you aren't like this in real life.
Enough.
Because I know some people at the top of the Tory party, past and present.
I regularly discuss the betting markets with some of these people.
Because of my day job I have regular enhanced DBS checks and credit checks, I really do not need the hassle because some people have been acting ethically dubious.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
No you muppet, why would they investigate you? You've clearly done nothing wrong. I was obviously saying the idea that they investigate you is "bile".
You need to get off that high horse of yours. I know you think everything I post is rubbish and you'd much rather I wasn't here but even when trying to defend you, you respond this way. It's not a good look, it comes across super rude and condescending, I have never met you (and don't ever plan to) but I hope you aren't like this in real life.
Enough.
He just mixed up "expects" with "hope". Thats all. Massive publicity for PB and zero chance of them finding anything improper (based on his post).
If his name is "on ze list" I suspect it will have a line through it as soon as someone points out he is editor of PB. They won't want their exciting inquiry derailed.
Labour's nightmare is Sunak wins the final head to head debate with Starmer on Wednesday and cuts Labour's lead and Sunak also wins back Tories leaning Reform over fears of Labour tax rises and after Farage's Putin comments. While some white working class Leavers who used to vote Labour, voted for Boris in 2019 now go Reform and some upper middle class ideological bohemian left liberals vote Green or stay home.
Mandelson is right therefore that while a Labour landslide looks odds on if all the above happened it could end up only a small Labour majority or even a hung parliament
Just got off the chopper after three and a half weeks of nights out in the middle of the North Sea.
Aberdeen looks very pretty in the sunshine this afternoon from my 6th floor room.
My taxi driver from the heliport said nothing about politics, immigration or current affairs.
I don't think I will ever make a globetrotting travel writer as clearly I don't meet the right sort of people.
The one thing I have noticed is that you don't get any of these chats with Uber drivers. I think they realise if they are a bit gobby/offensive then they will get poor ratings and getting poor ratings impacts the number/type of jobs they get.
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
Mr Brown said: "I will not allow house prices to get out of control and put at risk the sustainability of the future." He said he was determined that the UK should not return to the "instability, speculation and negative equity" of the 1980s and 1990s.
Well we didn't have banks going bankrupt in the 1980s and 1990s.
Nick Leeson just texted me and sayed it wasn't him who brought down BCCI or caused the small banks crisis.
BCCI - a bank few had heard of previously brought down by a trader in Singapore.
Not quite the same as half the High Street banks disappearing and almost taking down the entire UK housing market and economy.
If you refer to the GFC, it started in America. BCCI wiped out a lot of Asian business people here and triggered the so-called "small banks crisis" of the early 1990s.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
I'm far from convinced any of this is within the definition of "cheating" in the Gambling Act at all. But even if that's made out, a friend of a friend chancing pin money based on a rumour clearly isn't - it's the run of the mill information asymmetry on which betting is based ("I spoke to the trainer and he says Fat Bob is running well, so 10-1 is a steal").
The Gambling Commission has taken leave of its senses, in my view. It is making a very narrow matter very wide just because it's made headlines rather than on the basis of a robust legal interpretation and sober assessment of what is proportionate to the alleged harm.
Agree 100%.
I am fairly certain I am not the only PBer who put a bet of £20 or more on a July election around May 21st.
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
I too like graphs. Shall we do waiting lists?
How about number of NHS employees ?
For the long term trend of NHS employment:
The statistics show how the NHS workforce has grown and evolved over the past seven decades:
In 1949, there were 11,735 full time equivalent hospital doctors in England and Wales, including 3,488 consultants. By 2018 there were 109,509 full time equivalent medical and dental staff, including 46,297 consultants, in England.
In 1949, there were 68,013 registered nurses in hospitals in England and Wales. In 2018, that number stood at 320,422 (headcount).
There were 5,637 midwifery staff in 1949. By 2018 there were 26,519 (headcount).
In 1963 there were 22,159 GPs in England and Wales, 19,951 of whom were male and 2,208 of whom were female. In 2018 there were 41,693 GPs, 17,366 male and 21,736 female (headcount).
How much has the country benefitted from all this ?
There's been increases in life expectancy since 1948 but most (almost all ?) of that has been from other changes such as reductions in smoking and health destroying jobs.
Has the NHS now become a 'self licking ice cream' where its purpose is to keep sick oldies alive for a few more months which thereby creates more work for the NHS ?
How much taxpayers money is now being spent per each decile of human life ?
And how much benefit does that bring to individuals and the country generally ?
Why not see how many votes 'cutting the NHS' gets?
Here's the thing. Over the long-term the Standard of Living increases*. What do we spend that extra wealth on? Should we all have more 'stuff', or more money stashed away in savings, or more food or drink maybe?
Or should we spend that extra wealth on things like health, education, culture, national infrastructure, security? Things that improve the people's quality of life?
I know which I would rather have.
(*Except when we have 14 years of incompetent Tory government, it seems.)
I think it also demonstrates how woeful the last 14 years of management by the DoH has been that all the extra money and staff have been squandered for so little impact.
Not that I think Streeting will do much better. Indeed it is likely to end his political ambitions. No minister of Health has made PM since the NHS came into being.
I reckon Streeting will make quick(ish) gains. He is rightly targeting the utterly shite, anachronistic and institutionalised admin in the NHS as a first step. The hopeless, 1950s-style scheduling, the ring up at exactly 8am or get fucked nonsense, the coin-only car parks, and all the other manifold shades of sloppy shite that typify the service.
As an American, I would like to say that having an election on July 4th is - however intentionally - sporting of you. That date choice reminds me of the Canadian band that came down to march in our 4th of July parade a few years ago.
It’s just a shame that the day on which the first evidence for the existence of the Higgs Bosun was confirmed isn’t celebrated more widely.
Paris aside, on each of my recent visits to France - and I’ve been all over - Brittany, Normandy, Picardy, the Cevennes, Provence, Languedoc - I’ve been struck by the high quality of life. It’s not just the nicer weather - they have good health care, beautiful cities, agreeable food, excellent infrastructure, lots of holidays
They must have one of the highest “qualities of life” in the world. And I’m not just comparing them with fucked up old Britain. They seem to have a superior quality of life to almost anyone in europe (or the world?)
Yes they have problems - migration, crime, but still. Other countries have all that as well and often far worse
Yet the French are so discontented they are voting in their millions for a woman who says France is on the brink of ruin and forget about my Nazi dad only I can save you
WHY?
I’m around now and on the way to the greengrocers.
Good question. Statistically they aren’t doing that badly either. Their most deprived areas are nowhere near as deprived as the worst in Europe, and the average square mile of land in France is almost as pretty as the average square mile of Italy, but with things working more smoothly. Their birth rate is higher than most suggesting household optimism is holding up. But they are grumpy and discontented as hell.
I know many have tried to answer. I have a theory: France, like the French language, is a closed concept with rules. Other cultures - not all - are open source.
The French seem to assess their lives against a canonical notion of France and Frenchness. That involves the supremacy of the country’s constitution and history, its language, its wine, its social fabric. France must be the pinnacle or it is nothing. They find it wanting against this overly tough benchmark.
French is losing influence around the world because of its inflexibility. You don’t want a lingua Franca that you’re going to get constantly corrected on by the natives. French food and drink has also lost ground because of its inflexibility. France hasn’t integrated its migrant populations anywhere near as successfully as Britain because of the same fixed notion of integration that involves a migrant becoming canonically French.
So the people are grumpy. It’s as if France itself is held in an appellation controllee. It’s part of what makes it so charming to me but it means modern life will always be a disappointment.
Isn't it just inflation of expectation, a bit like America and indeed the UK too?
People bank the gains and soon forget, and it just fuels the demand for more as material desires can never be satisfied.
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
I too like graphs. Shall we do waiting lists?
How about number of NHS employees ?
For the long term trend of NHS employment:
The statistics show how the NHS workforce has grown and evolved over the past seven decades:
In 1949, there were 11,735 full time equivalent hospital doctors in England and Wales, including 3,488 consultants. By 2018 there were 109,509 full time equivalent medical and dental staff, including 46,297 consultants, in England.
In 1949, there were 68,013 registered nurses in hospitals in England and Wales. In 2018, that number stood at 320,422 (headcount).
There were 5,637 midwifery staff in 1949. By 2018 there were 26,519 (headcount).
In 1963 there were 22,159 GPs in England and Wales, 19,951 of whom were male and 2,208 of whom were female. In 2018 there were 41,693 GPs, 17,366 male and 21,736 female (headcount).
How much has the country benefitted from all this ?
There's been increases in life expectancy since 1948 but most (almost all ?) of that has been from other changes such as reductions in smoking and health destroying jobs.
Has the NHS now become a 'self licking ice cream' where its purpose is to keep sick oldies alive for a few more months which thereby creates more work for the NHS ?
How much taxpayers money is now being spent per each decile of human life ?
And how much benefit does that bring to individuals and the country generally ?
Why not see how many votes 'cutting the NHS' gets?
Here's the thing. Over the long-term the Standard of Living increases*. What do we spend that extra wealth on? Should we all have more 'stuff', or more money stashed away in savings, or more food or drink maybe?
Or should we spend that extra wealth on things like health, education, culture, national infrastructure, security? Things that improve the people's quality of life?
I know which I would rather have.
(*Except when we have 14 years of incompetent Tory government, it seems.)
I think it also demonstrates how woeful the last 14 years of management by the DoH has been that all the extra money and staff have been squandered for so little impact.
Not that I think Streeting will do much better. Indeed it is likely to end his political ambitions. No minister of Health has made PM since the NHS came into being.
I did confess to wondering if Labour planned a job swap between Streeting and Reeves when he commented a lot on economic policy but then I remembered he is one of their goto spox.
Paris aside, on each of my recent visits to France - and I’ve been all over - Brittany, Normandy, Picardy, the Cevennes, Provence, Languedoc - I’ve been struck by the high quality of life. It’s not just the nicer weather - they have good health care, beautiful cities, agreeable food, excellent infrastructure, lots of holidays
They must have one of the highest “qualities of life” in the world. And I’m not just comparing them with fucked up old Britain. They seem to have a superior quality of life to almost anyone in europe (or the world?)
Yes they have problems - migration, crime, but still. Other countries have all that as well and often far worse
Yet the French are so discontented they are voting in their millions for a woman who says France is on the brink of ruin and forget about my Nazi dad only I can save you
WHY?
I’m around now and on the way to the greengrocers.
Good question. Statistically they aren’t doing that badly either. Their most deprived areas are nowhere near as deprived as the worst in Europe, and the average square mile of land in France is almost as pretty as the average square mile of Italy, but with things working more smoothly. Their birth rate is higher than most suggesting household optimism is holding up. But they are grumpy and discontented as hell.
I know many have tried to answer. I have a theory: France, like the French language, is a closed concept with rules. Other cultures - not all - are open source.
The French seem to assess their lives against a canonical notion of France and Frenchness. That involves the supremacy of the country’s constitution and history, its language, its wine, its social fabric. France must be the pinnacle or it is nothing. They find it wanting against this overly tough benchmark.
French is losing influence around the world because of its inflexibility. You don’t want a lingua Franca that you’re going to get constantly corrected on by the natives. French food and drink has also lost ground because of its inflexibility. France hasn’t integrated its migrant populations anywhere near as successfully as Britain because of the same fixed notion of integration that involves a migrant becoming canonically French.
So the people are grumpy. It’s as if France itself is held in an appellation controllee. It’s part of what makes it so charming to me but it means modern life will always be a disappointment.
Isn't it just inflation of expectation, a bit like America and indeed the UK too?
People bank the gains and soon forget, and it just fuels the demand for more as material desires can never be satisfied.
That’s one way to describe it, but I would say it is of a different sort. America and Britain want to be great, the best, world leading, and their people get cross when they’re not (or even, in the USA’s case, when they are). But France requires itself to be the best in a very specific way.
Let’s return to the appellation contrôlée example. An American wine wants to win the best in class trophy or get 98 from Robert Parker. A French wine wants to exhibit “typicity”. Before it can think of winning anything it first must prove it is precisely as you would expect of a wine from that slope in that region.
Just had a relation ask me. "is it possible for Trump to become Prime Minister if Reform won an election, his mother is Scottish, so he could get a British Passport?"
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
I too like graphs. Shall we do waiting lists?
How about number of NHS employees ?
For the long term trend of NHS employment:
The statistics show how the NHS workforce has grown and evolved over the past seven decades:
In 1949, there were 11,735 full time equivalent hospital doctors in England and Wales, including 3,488 consultants. By 2018 there were 109,509 full time equivalent medical and dental staff, including 46,297 consultants, in England.
In 1949, there were 68,013 registered nurses in hospitals in England and Wales. In 2018, that number stood at 320,422 (headcount).
There were 5,637 midwifery staff in 1949. By 2018 there were 26,519 (headcount).
In 1963 there were 22,159 GPs in England and Wales, 19,951 of whom were male and 2,208 of whom were female. In 2018 there were 41,693 GPs, 17,366 male and 21,736 female (headcount).
How much has the country benefitted from all this ?
There's been increases in life expectancy since 1948 but most (almost all ?) of that has been from other changes such as reductions in smoking and health destroying jobs.
Has the NHS now become a 'self licking ice cream' where its purpose is to keep sick oldies alive for a few more months which thereby creates more work for the NHS ?
How much taxpayers money is now being spent per each decile of human life ?
And how much benefit does that bring to individuals and the country generally ?
Why not see how many votes 'cutting the NHS' gets?
Here's the thing. Over the long-term the Standard of Living increases*. What do we spend that extra wealth on? Should we all have more 'stuff', or more money stashed away in savings, or more food or drink maybe?
Or should we spend that extra wealth on things like health, education, culture, national infrastructure, security? Things that improve the people's quality of life?
I know which I would rather have.
(*Except when we have 14 years of incompetent Tory government, it seems.)
I think it also demonstrates how woeful the last 14 years of management by the DoH has been that all the extra money and staff have been squandered for so little impact.
Not that I think Streeting will do much better. Indeed it is likely to end his political ambitions. No minister of Health has made PM since the NHS came into being.
I did confess to wondering if Labour planned a job swap between Streeting and Reeves when he commented a lot on economic policy but then I remembered he is one of their goto spox.
Given that Streeting would sell his grandmother to advance his career, if they drop into being the next cabinet, as it would appear, we should watch for Streeting plunging the knife into Reeves, if he gets the chance. With her job he’d be sitting much prettier.
Just had a relation ask me. "is it possible for Trump to become Prime Minister if Reform won an election, his mother is Scottish, so he could get a British Passport?"
I will leave that nugget with you all.
Not if he gets a prison term of a year or more (even if suspended) though he could still be US President
The wonderful snobbiness of the French; their fastidiousness and obsession with presentation; the probity of culture; rather make La France what she is: the best country in the world. Probably.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
I'm far from convinced any of this is within the definition of "cheating" in the Gambling Act at all. But even if that's made out, a friend of a friend chancing pin money based on a rumour clearly isn't - it's the run of the mill information asymmetry on which betting is based ("I spoke to the trainer and he says Fat Bob is running well, so 10-1 is a steal").
The Gambling Commission has taken leave of its senses, in my view. It is making a very narrow matter very wide just because it's made headlines rather than on the basis of a robust legal interpretation and sober assessment of what is proportionate to the alleged harm.
Agree 100%.
I am fairly certain I am not the only PBer who put a bet of £20 or more on a July election around May 21st.
Perhaps they could void all bets on the BF exchange?
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
Those who bet before 21st May will probably be fine; those who bet on 21st will probably face a fine:
Fine for what by whom? You can't just fine people just because you are a Commission. Did Magna Carta die for nothing?
Ffs I nearly put a *comment in that post but then decided no one would be stupid enough to confuse a bit of wordplay with an actual proposal. I clearly overunderestimated.
(*To the effect that I wasn't seriously suggesting there will be fines.)
Ah ok sorry. I have just cycled 113 kilometres and I am not firing on all cylinders
Now I feel bad!
Well done on the 113km. Time for a beer or two, maybe?
Thank you. Beer after, rather than before, driving home
Paris aside, on each of my recent visits to France - and I’ve been all over - Brittany, Normandy, Picardy, the Cevennes, Provence, Languedoc - I’ve been struck by the high quality of life. It’s not just the nicer weather - they have good health care, beautiful cities, agreeable food, excellent infrastructure, lots of holidays
They must have one of the highest “qualities of life” in the world. And I’m not just comparing them with fucked up old Britain. They seem to have a superior quality of life to almost anyone in europe (or the world?)
Yes they have problems - migration, crime, but still. Other countries have all that as well and often far worse
Yet the French are so discontented they are voting in their millions for a woman who says France is on the brink of ruin and forget about my Nazi dad only I can save you
WHY?
I’m around now and on the way to the greengrocers.
Good question. Statistically they aren’t doing that badly either. Their most deprived areas are nowhere near as deprived as the worst in Europe, and the average square mile of land in France is almost as pretty as the average square mile of Italy, but with things working more smoothly. Their birth rate is higher than most suggesting household optimism is holding up. But they are grumpy and discontented as hell.
I know many have tried to answer. I have a theory: France, like the French language, is a closed concept with rules. Other cultures - not all - are open source.
The French seem to assess their lives against a canonical notion of France and Frenchness. That involves the supremacy of the country’s constitution and history, its language, its wine, its social fabric. France must be the pinnacle or it is nothing. They find it wanting against this overly tough benchmark.
French is losing influence around the world because of its inflexibility. You don’t want a lingua Franca that you’re going to get constantly corrected on by the natives. French food and drink has also lost ground because of its inflexibility. France hasn’t integrated its migrant populations anywhere near as successfully as Britain because of the same fixed notion of integration that involves a migrant becoming canonically French.
So the people are grumpy. It’s as if France itself is held in an appellation controllee. It’s part of what makes it so charming to me but it means modern life will always be a disappointment.
Isn't it just inflation of expectation, a bit like America and indeed the UK too?
People bank the gains and soon forget, and it just fuels the demand for more as material desires can never be satisfied.
That’s one way to describe it, but I would say it is of a different sort. America and Britain want to be great, the best, world leading, and their people get cross when they’re not (or even, in the USA’s case, when they are). But France requires itself to be the best in a very specific way.
Let’s return to the appellation contrôlée example. An American wine wants to win the best in class trophy or get 98 from Robert Parker. A French wine wants to exhibit “typicity”. Before it can think of winning anything it first must prove it is precisely as you would expect of a wine from that slope in that region.
That France defined much about how the EU works explains Brexit, too. Had we possessed more patience, and strategic sense, we could have stayed in and changed that.
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
I too like graphs. Shall we do waiting lists?
How about number of NHS employees ?
For the long term trend of NHS employment:
The statistics show how the NHS workforce has grown and evolved over the past seven decades:
In 1949, there were 11,735 full time equivalent hospital doctors in England and Wales, including 3,488 consultants. By 2018 there were 109,509 full time equivalent medical and dental staff, including 46,297 consultants, in England.
In 1949, there were 68,013 registered nurses in hospitals in England and Wales. In 2018, that number stood at 320,422 (headcount).
There were 5,637 midwifery staff in 1949. By 2018 there were 26,519 (headcount).
In 1963 there were 22,159 GPs in England and Wales, 19,951 of whom were male and 2,208 of whom were female. In 2018 there were 41,693 GPs, 17,366 male and 21,736 female (headcount).
How much has the country benefitted from all this ?
There's been increases in life expectancy since 1948 but most (almost all ?) of that has been from other changes such as reductions in smoking and health destroying jobs.
Has the NHS now become a 'self licking ice cream' where its purpose is to keep sick oldies alive for a few more months which thereby creates more work for the NHS ?
How much taxpayers money is now being spent per each decile of human life ?
And how much benefit does that bring to individuals and the country generally ?
Why not see how many votes 'cutting the NHS' gets?
Here's the thing. Over the long-term the Standard of Living increases*. What do we spend that extra wealth on? Should we all have more 'stuff', or more money stashed away in savings, or more food or drink maybe?
Or should we spend that extra wealth on things like health, education, culture, national infrastructure, security? Things that improve the people's quality of life?
I know which I would rather have.
(*Except when we have 14 years of incompetent Tory government, it seems.)
I think it also demonstrates how woeful the last 14 years of management by the DoH has been that all the extra money and staff have been squandered for so little impact.
Not that I think Streeting will do much better. Indeed it is likely to end his political ambitions. No minister of Health has made PM since the NHS came into being.
I did confess to wondering if Labour planned a job swap between Streeting and Reeves when he commented a lot on economic policy but then I remembered he is one of their goto spox.
Given that Streeting would sell his grandmother to advance his career, if they drop into being the next cabinet, as it would appear, we should watch for Streeting plunging the knife into Reeves, if he gets the chance. With her job he’d be sitting much prettier.
There’s nothing pretty about Wes Streeting. The man’s about as attractive as a jellyfish with a bad case of acne and a cold sore.
I had an Uber driver the other day openly tell me that Sadiq Khan stole the election and that Muslims are destroying London.
Most of them are fine - but in most walks of life you always meet nutters unfortunately.
I remember as a kid a group of us travelling on a 159 bus through Kennington and a West Indian guy regaling us about the National Front of which he claimed to be a member. Funny old world.
Just had a relation ask me. "is it possible for Trump to become Prime Minister if Reform won an election, his mother is Scottish, so he could get a British Passport?"
I will leave that nugget with you all.
Is there a nationality law for British Prime Ministers? We've had Canadians and half-Americans in the past.
Just had a relation ask me. "is it possible for Trump to become Prime Minister if Reform won an election, his mother is Scottish, so he could get a British Passport?"
I will leave that nugget with you all.
No he cannot get a British passport...
You may automatically be a British citizen if you were born before 1 January 1983 and: - you were born outside the UK - your father is British
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
I'm far from convinced any of this is within the definition of "cheating" in the Gambling Act at all. But even if that's made out, a friend of a friend chancing pin money based on a rumour clearly isn't - it's the run of the mill information asymmetry on which betting is based ("I spoke to the trainer and he says Fat Bob is running well, so 10-1 is a steal").
The Gambling Commission has taken leave of its senses, in my view. It is making a very narrow matter very wide just because it's made headlines rather than on the basis of a robust legal interpretation and sober assessment of what is proportionate to the alleged harm.
Agree 100%.
I am fairly certain I am not the only PBer who put a bet of £20 or more on a July election around May 21st.
I have to say it surprises me a bit that more journos haven't queried the Gambling Commission's incredibly broad view of "interference or deception".
There is nothing in this that comes close to "interference" (I very much doubt the data officer at CCHQ twisted Sunak's arm to meet his own bets). And "deception" is highly dubious - I simply do not see in what sense failing to tell Ladbrokes you have knowledge they do not is "deception".
Is it foolish? Does it look bad? Might people's employment contracts say things? Very possibly. But criminal? I don't buy it, I'm afraid.
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
This graph says otherwise. Look at the dates.
I too like graphs. Shall we do waiting lists?
How about number of NHS employees ?
For the long term trend of NHS employment:
The statistics show how the NHS workforce has grown and evolved over the past seven decades:
In 1949, there were 11,735 full time equivalent hospital doctors in England and Wales, including 3,488 consultants. By 2018 there were 109,509 full time equivalent medical and dental staff, including 46,297 consultants, in England.
In 1949, there were 68,013 registered nurses in hospitals in England and Wales. In 2018, that number stood at 320,422 (headcount).
There were 5,637 midwifery staff in 1949. By 2018 there were 26,519 (headcount).
In 1963 there were 22,159 GPs in England and Wales, 19,951 of whom were male and 2,208 of whom were female. In 2018 there were 41,693 GPs, 17,366 male and 21,736 female (headcount).
How much has the country benefitted from all this ?
There's been increases in life expectancy since 1948 but most (almost all ?) of that has been from other changes such as reductions in smoking and health destroying jobs.
Has the NHS now become a 'self licking ice cream' where its purpose is to keep sick oldies alive for a few more months which thereby creates more work for the NHS ?
How much taxpayers money is now being spent per each decile of human life ?
And how much benefit does that bring to individuals and the country generally ?
Why not see how many votes 'cutting the NHS' gets?
Here's the thing. Over the long-term the Standard of Living increases*. What do we spend that extra wealth on? Should we all have more 'stuff', or more money stashed away in savings, or more food or drink maybe?
Or should we spend that extra wealth on things like health, education, culture, national infrastructure, security? Things that improve the people's quality of life?
I know which I would rather have.
(*Except when we have 14 years of incompetent Tory government, it seems.)
I think it also demonstrates how woeful the last 14 years of management by the DoH has been that all the extra money and staff have been squandered for so little impact.
Not that I think Streeting will do much better. Indeed it is likely to end his political ambitions. No minister of Health has made PM since the NHS came into being.
I reckon Streeting will make quick(ish) gains. He is rightly targeting the utterly shite, anachronistic and institutionalised admin in the NHS as a first step. The hopeless, 1950s-style scheduling, the ring up at exactly 8am or get fucked nonsense, the coin-only car parks, and all the other manifold shades of sloppy shite that typify the service.
The simplist and cheapest improvement is to allow GPs to use the ARRs funding to pay GPs. It wouldn't require any additional money to be found.
Just had a relation ask me. "is it possible for Trump to become Prime Minister if Reform won an election, his mother is Scottish, so he could get a British Passport?"
I will leave that nugget with you all.
No he cannot get a British passport...
You may automatically be a British citizen if you were born before 1 January 1983 and: - you were born outside the UK - your father is British
The wonderful snobbiness of the French; their fastidiousness and obsession with presentation; the probity of culture; rather make La France what she is: the best country in the world. Probably.
Paris aside, on each of my recent visits to France - and I’ve been all over - Brittany, Normandy, Picardy, the Cevennes, Provence, Languedoc - I’ve been struck by the high quality of life. It’s not just the nicer weather - they have good health care, beautiful cities, agreeable food, excellent infrastructure, lots of holidays
They must have one of the highest “qualities of life” in the world. And I’m not just comparing them with fucked up old Britain. They seem to have a superior quality of life to almost anyone in europe (or the world?)
Yes they have problems - migration, crime, but still. Other countries have all that as well and often far worse
Yet the French are so discontented they are voting in their millions for a woman who says France is on the brink of ruin and forget about my Nazi dad only I can save you
WHY?
I’m around now and on the way to the greengrocers.
Good question. Statistically they aren’t doing that badly either. Their most deprived areas are nowhere near as deprived as the worst in Europe, and the average square mile of land in France is almost as pretty as the average square mile of Italy, but with things working more smoothly. Their birth rate is higher than most suggesting household optimism is holding up. But they are grumpy and discontented as hell.
I know many have tried to answer. I have a theory: France, like the French language, is a closed concept with rules. Other cultures - not all - are open source.
The French seem to assess their lives against a canonical notion of France and Frenchness. That involves the supremacy of the country’s constitution and history, its language, its wine, its social fabric. France must be the pinnacle or it is nothing. They find it wanting against this overly tough benchmark.
French is losing influence around the world because of its inflexibility. You don’t want a lingua Franca that you’re going to get constantly corrected on by the natives. French food and drink has also lost ground because of its inflexibility. France hasn’t integrated its migrant populations anywhere near as successfully as Britain because of the same fixed notion of integration that involves a migrant becoming canonically French.
So the people are grumpy. It’s as if France itself is held in an appellation controllee. It’s part of what makes it so charming to me but it means modern life will always be a disappointment.
Isn't it just inflation of expectation, a bit like America and indeed the UK too?
People bank the gains and soon forget, and it just fuels the demand for more as material desires can never be satisfied.
That’s one way to describe it, but I would say it is of a different sort. America and Britain want to be great, the best, world leading, and their people get cross when they’re not (or even, in the USA’s case, when they are). But France requires itself to be the best in a very specific way.
Let’s return to the appellation contrôlée example. An American wine wants to win the best in class trophy or get 98 from Robert Parker. A French wine wants to exhibit “typicity”. Before it can think of winning anything it first must prove it is precisely as you would expect of a wine from that slope in that region.
And rightly so!
Sante! 🍷
If you talk to the small producers, they are a lot less full of that bullshit. They leave it to outfits like Laroche.
That’s the Laroche winery outside Chablis, where Goldfinger is planning Grand Slam.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
I'm far from convinced any of this is within the definition of "cheating" in the Gambling Act at all. But even if that's made out, a friend of a friend chancing pin money based on a rumour clearly isn't - it's the run of the mill information asymmetry on which betting is based ("I spoke to the trainer and he says Fat Bob is running well, so 10-1 is a steal").
The Gambling Commission has taken leave of its senses, in my view. It is making a very narrow matter very wide just because it's made headlines rather than on the basis of a robust legal interpretation and sober assessment of what is proportionate to the alleged harm.
Agree 100%.
I am fairly certain I am not the only PBer who put a bet of £20 or more on a July election around May 21st.
I have to say it surprises me a bit that more journos haven't queried the Gambling Commission's incredibly broad view of "interference or deception".
There is nothing in this that comes close to "interference" (I very much doubt the data officer at CCHQ twisted Sunak's arm to meet his own bets). And "deception" is highly dubious - I simply do not see in what sense failing to tell Ladbrokes you have knowledge they do not is "deception".
Is it foolish? Does it look bad? Might people's employment contracts say things? Very possibly. But criminal? I don't buy it, I'm afraid.
I know, but from my experience a lot of journos do not understand betting exchanges or the spreads.
It's not even pumping and dumping* which I think might meet the threshold of interference/deception.
*For all you delicate flowers, pumping and dumping isn't an innuendo but a form of market manipulation.
The Labour Government of 1997 to 2010 is the greatest government this country has had since WW2.
Its amusing how much you complain about the cost of housing, when it was the last Labour Government that created the problem by ensuring housing costs ballooned out of control under their tenure.
And then we had the introduction of tuition fees too.
All the things you routinely complain about were made far worse by the last Labour Government.
Hopefully Starmer has learnt from their mistakes and doesn't repeat them.
I suspect that there were many within the Conservative Party who had prior knowledge of the July Date. In the first week of the campaign we had 2 postal deliveries from the Tories. Usually these have to be booked 2-3 weeks in advance so someone was in the know.
If Labour does get a massive majority, that is the time to pass proper planning reform.
I posted the other day about what they could do on mast building (as it's my area of expertise). But they should also do lots on housing. They will be able to get this stuff through.
Senior Tory official becomes FOURTH party figure subject to gambling watchdog investigation…
With reports of “many more” cases being looked at (though unclear yet if they have Tory links) election betting scandal now undermining party’s campaign…
Somewhere there will be a few innocent punters who just happened to put a few quid on July that same day, who will now get dragged into being suspects in this growing investigation!
I am expecting to be contacted.
What an utter load of bile
Are you ever right about anything?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
I'm far from convinced any of this is within the definition of "cheating" in the Gambling Act at all. But even if that's made out, a friend of a friend chancing pin money based on a rumour clearly isn't - it's the run of the mill information asymmetry on which betting is based ("I spoke to the trainer and he says Fat Bob is running well, so 10-1 is a steal").
The Gambling Commission has taken leave of its senses, in my view. It is making a very narrow matter very wide just because it's made headlines rather than on the basis of a robust legal interpretation and sober assessment of what is proportionate to the alleged harm.
Agree 100%.
I am fairly certain I am not the only PBer who put a bet of £20 or more on a July election around May 21st.
I have to say it surprises me a bit that more journos haven't queried the Gambling Commission's incredibly broad view of "interference or deception".
There is nothing in this that comes close to "interference" (I very much doubt the data officer at CCHQ twisted Sunak's arm to meet his own bets). And "deception" is highly dubious - I simply do not see in what sense failing to tell Ladbrokes you have knowledge they do not is "deception".
Is it foolish? Does it look bad? Might people's employment contracts say things? Very possibly. But criminal? I don't buy it, I'm afraid.
The Gambling Commission is extending its reach, or some might say trying it on. Journalists magnify the threat of prison sentences.
However, the political harm is done, like partygate (doubly so because it reminds voters of that affair, and that the rules do not apply to our gilded ruling class). It should have been obvious to all that even if not illegal, these bets were unethical and unwise. Most white collar organisations have a variant on the Private Eye test. If you would not want to read about yourself in Private Eye, don't do it.
Paris aside, on each of my recent visits to France - and I’ve been all over - Brittany, Normandy, Picardy, the Cevennes, Provence, Languedoc - I’ve been struck by the high quality of life. It’s not just the nicer weather - they have good health care, beautiful cities, agreeable food, excellent infrastructure, lots of holidays
They must have one of the highest “qualities of life” in the world. And I’m not just comparing them with fucked up old Britain. They seem to have a superior quality of life to almost anyone in europe (or the world?)
Yes they have problems - migration, crime, but still. Other countries have all that as well and often far worse
Yet the French are so discontented they are voting in their millions for a woman who says France is on the brink of ruin and forget about my Nazi dad only I can save you
WHY?
I’m around now and on the way to the greengrocers.
Good question. Statistically they aren’t doing that badly either. Their most deprived areas are nowhere near as deprived as the worst in Europe, and the average square mile of land in France is almost as pretty as the average square mile of Italy, but with things working more smoothly. Their birth rate is higher than most suggesting household optimism is holding up. But they are grumpy and discontented as hell.
I know many have tried to answer. I have a theory: France, like the French language, is a closed concept with rules. Other cultures - not all - are open source.
The French seem to assess their lives against a canonical notion of France and Frenchness. That involves the supremacy of the country’s constitution and history, its language, its wine, its social fabric. France must be the pinnacle or it is nothing. They find it wanting against this overly tough benchmark.
French is losing influence around the world because of its inflexibility. You don’t want a lingua Franca that you’re going to get constantly corrected on by the natives. French food and drink has also lost ground because of its inflexibility. France hasn’t integrated its migrant populations anywhere near as successfully as Britain because of the same fixed notion of integration that involves a migrant becoming canonically French.
So the people are grumpy. It’s as if France itself is held in an appellation controllee. It’s part of what makes it so charming to me but it means modern life will always be a disappointment.
Isn't it just inflation of expectation, a bit like America and indeed the UK too?
People bank the gains and soon forget, and it just fuels the demand for more as material desires can never be satisfied.
That’s one way to describe it, but I would say it is of a different sort. America and Britain want to be great, the best, world leading, and their people get cross when they’re not (or even, in the USA’s case, when they are). But France requires itself to be the best in a very specific way.
Let’s return to the appellation contrôlée example. An American wine wants to win the best in class trophy or get 98 from Robert Parker. A French wine wants to exhibit “typicity”. Before it can think of winning anything it first must prove it is precisely as you would expect of a wine from that slope in that region.
And rightly so!
Sante! 🍷
If you talk to the small producers, they are a lot less full of that bullshit. They leave it to outfits like Laroche.
That’s the Laroche winery outside Chablis, where Goldfinger is planning Grand Slam.
There are some small producers who have freed themselves a bit of that bullshit, but they are treated as brave pioneers. I remember the column inches devoted to a maverick group of vignerons who had dared to plant Syrah and Viognier in one small vineyard in Beaujolais. It was the most exciting thing ever.
There are also plenty of small producers who absolutely exude the bullshit because they know what side their bread is buttered (though note I do think typicity has its place, we need more of it in English wine).
Just had a relation ask me. "is it possible for Trump to become Prime Minister if Reform won an election, his mother is Scottish, so he could get a British Passport?"
I will leave that nugget with you all.
No he cannot get a British passport...
You may automatically be a British citizen if you were born before 1 January 1983 and: - you were born outside the UK - your father is British
Comments
Leicester East is a crazy election. I am quite happy with my fiver on Vaz at 41.
He went to court in his best suit, shoes, and Rolex and ended up in prison with those.
His suit was taken from him and he was given prison clothes, so there he was wearing expensive shoes and a Rolex.
All the prisoners kept on asking him for money to help out their families etc.
It was grim six months for him.
Winning a majority when you only had 202 seats in the last election is tougher.
People are strange creatures and an incumbent often has a stickyness that makes the difference, plus there are plenty of Big Gs out there and plenty of left wing BJOs who are appalled at SKS treachery from Corbyns true path and will vote Green.
I would not be at all surprised if Labour have an uncomfortably small majority or none. Despite the Tories best efforts.
Plus the Reformgasm is a nightmare for pollsters who can not rely on previous demographic behaviour with a new major player on the block.
(*To the effect that I wasn't seriously suggesting there will be fines.)
'The current wife' is also allowable these days.
Good question. Statistically they aren’t doing that badly either. Their most deprived areas are nowhere near as deprived as the worst in Europe, and the average square mile of land in France is almost as pretty as the average square mile of Italy, but with things working more smoothly. Their birth rate is higher than most suggesting household optimism is holding up. But they are grumpy and discontented as hell.
I know many have tried to answer. I have a theory: France, like the French language, is a closed concept with rules. Other cultures - not all - are open source.
The French seem to assess their lives against a canonical notion of France and Frenchness. That involves the supremacy of the country’s constitution and history, its language, its wine, its social fabric. France must be the pinnacle or it is nothing. They find it wanting against this overly tough benchmark.
French is losing influence around the world because of its inflexibility. You don’t want a lingua Franca that you’re going to get constantly corrected on by the natives. French food and drink has also lost ground because of its inflexibility. France hasn’t integrated its migrant populations anywhere near as successfully as Britain because of the same fixed notion of integration that involves a migrant becoming canonically French.
So the people are grumpy. It’s as if France itself is held in an appellation controllee. It’s part of what makes it so charming to me but it means modern life will always be a disappointment.
The statistics show how the NHS workforce has grown and evolved over the past seven decades:
In 1949, there were 11,735 full time equivalent hospital doctors in England and Wales, including 3,488 consultants.
By 2018 there were 109,509 full time equivalent medical and dental staff, including 46,297 consultants, in England.
In 1949, there were 68,013 registered nurses in hospitals in England and Wales.
In 2018, that number stood at 320,422 (headcount).
There were 5,637 midwifery staff in 1949.
By 2018 there were 26,519 (headcount).
In 1963 there were 22,159 GPs in England and Wales, 19,951 of whom were male and 2,208 of whom were female.
In 2018 there were 41,693 GPs, 17,366 male and 21,736 female (headcount).
https://digital.nhs.uk/news/2018/workforce-factsheet
How much has the country benefitted from all this ?
There's been increases in life expectancy since 1948 but most (almost all ?) of that has been from other changes such as reductions in smoking and health destroying jobs.
Has the NHS now become a 'self licking ice cream' where its purpose is to keep sick oldies alive for a few more months which thereby creates more work for the NHS ?
How much taxpayers money is now being spent per each decile of human life ?
And how much benefit does that bring to individuals and the country generally ?
And in a major new development, the watchdog has widened its inquiries to investigate whether people with inside knowledge may have asked a third party to place a bet for them.
Sky News also understands that investigators have written to leading bookmakers asking for details of bets of £20 or more on the election date within days of Rishi Sunak announcing it on May 22.
https://news.sky.com/story/many-more-people-investigated-over-election-betting-claims-13157425
People bank the gains and soon forget, and it just fuels the demand for more as material desires can never be satisfied.
Here's the thing. Over the long-term the Standard of Living increases*. What do we spend that extra wealth on? Should we all have more 'stuff', or more money stashed away in savings, or more food or drink maybe?
Or should we spend that extra wealth on things like health, education, culture, national infrastructure, security? Things that improve the people's quality of life?
I know which I would rather have.
(*Except when we have 14 years of incompetent Tory government, it seems.)
That is those who had some experience by 2010.
Blair/Brown perpetuated Thatcher's bigger mistakes. There's a lesson there for the 'continuity of policy in the first term' crew.
The first year of your first term is when you set the agenda for the rest of that term - and the next, if you're both competent and lucky.
1. Win the game
2. Chase the target with a few overs to spare to ensure our NRR is sufficiently good to ensure we get through notwithstanding the result in SA v WI
Aberdeen looks very pretty in the sunshine this afternoon from my 6th floor room.
My taxi driver from the heliport said nothing about politics, immigration or current affairs.
I don't think I will ever make a globetrotting travel writer as clearly I don't meet the right sort of people.
Well done on the 113km. Time for a beer or two, maybe?
Not quite the same as half the High Street banks disappearing and almost taking down the entire UK housing market and economy.
You need to get off that high horse of yours. I know you think everything I post is rubbish and you'd much rather I wasn't here but even when trying to defend you, you respond this way. It's not a good look, it comes across super rude and condescending, I have never met you (and don't ever plan to) but I hope you aren't like this in real life.
Enough.
Not that I think Streeting will do much better. Indeed it is likely to end his political ambitions. No minister of Health has made PM since the NHS came into being.
Or maybe you are just trollcasting?
Let’s return to the appellation contrôlée example. An American wine wants to win the best in class trophy or get 98 from Robert Parker. A French wine wants to exhibit “typicity”. Before it can think of winning anything it first must prove it is precisely as you would expect of a wine from that slope in that region.
I regularly discuss the betting markets with some of these people.
My day job I have regular enhanced DBS checks and credit checks, I really do not need the hassle because some people have been acting ethically dubious.
I'm far from convinced any of this is within the definition of "cheating" in the Gambling Act at all. But even if that's made out, a friend of a friend chancing pin money based on a rumour clearly isn't - it's the run of the mill information asymmetry on which betting is based ("I spoke to the trainer and he says Fat Bob is running well, so 10-1 is a steal").
The Gambling Commission has taken leave of its senses, in my view. It is making a very narrow matter very wide just because it's made headlines rather than on the basis of a robust legal interpretation and sober assessment of what is proportionate to the alleged harm.
If his name is "on ze list" I suspect it will have a line through it as soon as someone points out he is editor of PB. They won't want their exciting inquiry derailed.
Mandelson is right therefore that while a Labour landslide looks odds on if all the above happened it could end up only a small Labour majority or even a hung parliament
I am fairly certain I am not the only PBer who put a bet of £20 or more on a July election around May 21st.
Most of them are fine - but in most walks of life you always meet nutters unfortunately.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeSYRdfbo0k
Sante! 🍷
I will leave that nugget with you all.
He probably could if he were prepared to pay substantial penalties.
Should he win a couple of races and beat Russell, then certainly.
Asking for a friend
Had we possessed more patience, and strategic sense, we could have stayed in and changed that.
You may automatically be a British citizen if you were born before 1 January 1983 and:
- you were born outside the UK
- your father is British
https://www.gov.uk/apply-citizenship-british-parent/born-before-1983
Rules back for people born before 1983 are sexist. Rules for people born after 1983 are much tougher.
There is nothing in this that comes close to "interference" (I very much doubt the data officer at CCHQ twisted Sunak's arm to meet his own bets). And "deception" is highly dubious - I simply do not see in what sense failing to tell Ladbrokes you have knowledge they do not is "deception".
Is it foolish? Does it look bad? Might people's employment contracts say things? Very possibly. But criminal? I don't buy it, I'm afraid.
https://www.bma.org.uk/bma-media-centre/over-80-of-locum-gps-struggle-to-find-work-finds-bma-survey
To have simultaneously created a crisis of GP appointment access and a GP unemployment crisis is pretty impressive even for Sunak.
I can get one through the male line on the other side of the family.
All were born in NI and British Citizens.
If I want to troll my Remainer mate I mention it casually.
If it were true, why didn't they restart building council houses ?
They just copied Thatcher on housing.
That’s the Laroche winery outside Chablis, where Goldfinger is planning Grand Slam.
It's not even pumping and dumping* which I think might meet the threshold of interference/deception.
*For all you delicate flowers, pumping and dumping isn't an innuendo but a form of market manipulation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pump_and_dump
And then we had the introduction of tuition fees too.
All the things you routinely complain about were made far worse by the last Labour Government.
Hopefully Starmer has learnt from their mistakes and doesn't repeat them.
Because it couldn’t have been achieved any more decisively than it has.
I guess that the answer is that the Tories became unduly fixated upon the pensioner vote?
Prizing short-term over long-term; that should be chiselled onto every politician’s gravestone.
I posted the other day about what they could do on mast building (as it's my area of expertise). But they should also do lots on housing. They will be able to get this stuff through.
However, the political harm is done, like partygate (doubly so because it reminds voters of that affair, and that the rules do not apply to our gilded ruling class). It should have been obvious to all that even if not illegal, these bets were unethical and unwise. Most white collar organisations have a variant on the Private Eye test. If you would not want to read about yourself in Private Eye, don't do it.
There are also plenty of small producers who absolutely exude the bullshit because they know what side their bread is buttered (though note I do think typicity has its place, we need more of it in English wine).
Would be even funnier if Trump then took them to court claiming sexism and the whole thing turned into a circus.