It's fun to see the commentary on the SNP swing all the way back the other way. After 2015 there were shrill voices complaining of a one party state (when they got 50% of the vote). Now it's talk of annihilation (and they're heading for about 30% of the vote I think).
One of the reasons I don't like FPTP is the unjust seat distributions (honestly, 56/59 seats was insane), but the other aspect is how exaggerated the effects, and therefore the reactions, are.
None of this will dent the Labour joy or the SNP pain -- a huge number of seats have changed hands. But in the cold light of day it's looking like SNP have a decent base to build back on. If they can keep their fucking fingers out of tills/young boys/expenses/jail!
ANME: final update. We did it, we shifted the Tories out! Big thanks to Rochdale for helping with that. I'm certain with a non-existent campaign from the Lib Dems the Tories would have clung on. Finishing last shouldn't be a mark of shame, it was a small contribution but a big effect. I'm delighted we have an MP who isn't Conservative or Reform.
Future: my vote is immediately back in play, and the rules have changed. The Tories have had the kicking they so richly deserved and needed. My priority is probably going to be back to Europe again next election. Immediate favourites will be Lib Dem and SNP, but we'll see how policy stances develop. I'm much less likely to vote tactically next time, but we're going to have to keep an eye on whether the Tories lurch rightwards. I could vote again to keep them out if they're still a shitshow or worse. But I think they'll turn towards the light.
Hi @Farooq - thanks so much for your very kind words. I am Absolutely Clear that my campaign played a part in ousting DRoss. Both the Tories and SNP had to respond to it, and last night the SNP team were complementary about the fact that "you've been all over my fucking Facebook" - in a goodhearted way (which makes a change from Cybernat twattery).
It was increasingly clear that people were going vote tactically for the Tories in fear of the SNP. We didn't get squeezed despite the obvious squeeze. We didn't go backwards, we went forwards.
And what hinterland do we now have? A pyrrhic victory for Logan, the SNP crushed so that it fits into a minibus. No need to fear the SNP any longer. Their pitch was that "If the SNP wins a majority of seats in this election in Scotland, the Scottish government will embark on negotiations with the UK government to run the democratic wishes of people in Scotland into a reality."
The people of Scotland have spoken. Emphatically. And rejected independence. Massively. On the terms offered by the SNP.
No need to vote Tory in fear any longer. My campaign for Holyrood starts now.
It's fun to see the commentary on the SNP swing all the way back the other way. After 2015 there were shrill voices complaining of a one party state (when they got 50% of the vote). Now it's talk of annihilation (and they're heading for about 30% of the vote I think).
One of the reasons I don't like FPTP is the unjust seat distributions (honestly, 56/59 seats was insane), but the other aspect is how exaggerated the effects, and therefore the reactions, are.
None of this will dent the Labour joy or the SNP pain -- a huge number of seats have changed hands. But in the cold light of day it's looking like SNP have a decent base to build back on. If they can keep their fucking fingers out of tills/young boys/expenses/jail!
ANME: final update. We did it, we shifted the Tories out! Big thanks to Rochdale for helping with that. I'm certain with a non-existent campaign from the Lib Dems the Tories would have clung on. Finishing last shouldn't be a mark of shame, it was a small contribution but a big effect. I'm delighted we have an MP who isn't Conservative or Reform.
Future: my vote is immediately back in play, and the rules have changed. The Tories have had the kicking they so richly deserved and needed. My priority is probably going to be back to Europe again next election. Immediate favourites will be Lib Dem and SNP, but we'll see how policy stances develop. I'm much less likely to vote tactically next time, but we're going to have to keep an eye on whether the Tories lurch rightwards. I could vote again to keep them out if they're still a shitshow or worse. But I think they'll turn towards the light.
I think that's a decent take.
That graph Horse posted is fascinating - much of it is FPTP and vote efficiency and how it varies. That's the riules of the FPTP game, which to be fair to both parties the LDs and SNP have always decried.
Yup. One of the weirder takes has been people getting low-key annoyed at how many seats the Lib Dems have taken with their vote share. I think they're on for 11% of the seats with 12% of the vote? Maybe? Which is like... that's still underperforming what a fair system would look like. Reform voters absolutely should not target their ire at the Lib Dems, who are allies in this particular area.
But they will, because they're thick as shit.
Yes, they should hammer the Tories to back voting change and enter into alliance.
Obviously the Tories will say no, that would mean accepting a right wing rival as a permanent force, but it helps prevent Reform support backsliding by keeping the distinction.
It's fun to see the commentary on the SNP swing all the way back the other way. After 2015 there were shrill voices complaining of a one party state (when they got 50% of the vote). Now it's talk of annihilation (and they're heading for about 30% of the vote I think).
One of the reasons I don't like FPTP is the unjust seat distributions (honestly, 56/59 seats was insane), but the other aspect is how exaggerated the effects, and therefore the reactions, are.
None of this will dent the Labour joy or the SNP pain -- a huge number of seats have changed hands. But in the cold light of day it's looking like SNP have a decent base to build back on. If they can keep their fucking fingers out of tills/young boys/expenses/jail!
ANME: final update. We did it, we shifted the Tories out! Big thanks to Rochdale for helping with that. I'm certain with a non-existent campaign from the Lib Dems the Tories would have clung on. Finishing last shouldn't be a mark of shame, it was a small contribution but a big effect. I'm delighted we have an MP who isn't Conservative or Reform.
Future: my vote is immediately back in play, and the rules have changed. The Tories have had the kicking they so richly deserved and needed. My priority is probably going to be back to Europe again next election. Immediate favourites will be Lib Dem and SNP, but we'll see how policy stances develop. I'm much less likely to vote tactically next time, but we're going to have to keep an eye on whether the Tories lurch rightwards. I could vote again to keep them out if they're still a shitshow or worse. But I think they'll turn towards the light.
How do you see yourself voting with your Holyrood votes in 2026?
(Tell me to feck off if you don't want to answer, heck tell me to feck off if you do want to answer.)
I think the Holyrood election of 2026 could re-energise Scottish nationalism.
I don't know. A lot depend on how Labour will govern. My priority is Europe, and the noises haven't been positive from Labour on that but I'll wait and see.
We do have two votes, so I could do what I've done in the past and split them, e.g. Lib Dem and SNP. Labour and Green are in play, Conservative unlikely unless they really show some Starmer-esque vigour in heading hard for the centre and make positive Euro-friendly noises. Reform and Alba, never never never. There'll probably be some other minor parties around that won't impinge much on my consciousness.
Thanks.
George Osborne said something last night, which I think is unsustainable and not very democratic.
He said the only way we will get Indyref2 is if we have a Lab/SNP coalition at Westminster.
I think if we see 2011 style Holyrood results/2015 Westminster results in Scotland that's going to cause issues for the Union.
It's fun to see the commentary on the SNP swing all the way back the other way. After 2015 there were shrill voices complaining of a one party state (when they got 50% of the vote). Now it's talk of annihilation (and they're heading for about 30% of the vote I think).
One of the reasons I don't like FPTP is the unjust seat distributions (honestly, 56/59 seats was insane), but the other aspect is how exaggerated the effects, and therefore the reactions, are.
None of this will dent the Labour joy or the SNP pain -- a huge number of seats have changed hands. But in the cold light of day it's looking like SNP have a decent base to build back on. If they can keep their fucking fingers out of tills/young boys/expenses/jail!
ANME: final update. We did it, we shifted the Tories out! Big thanks to Rochdale for helping with that. I'm certain with a non-existent campaign from the Lib Dems the Tories would have clung on. Finishing last shouldn't be a mark of shame, it was a small contribution but a big effect. I'm delighted we have an MP who isn't Conservative or Reform.
Future: my vote is immediately back in play, and the rules have changed. The Tories have had the kicking they so richly deserved and needed. My priority is probably going to be back to Europe again next election. Immediate favourites will be Lib Dem and SNP, but we'll see how policy stances develop. I'm much less likely to vote tactically next time, but we're going to have to keep an eye on whether the Tories lurch rightwards. I could vote again to keep them out if they're still a shitshow or worse. But I think they'll turn towards the light.
Hi @Farooq - thanks so much for your very kind words. I am Absolutely Clear that my campaign played a part in ousting DRoss. Both the Tories and SNP had to respond to it, and last night the SNP team were complementary about the fact that "you've been all over my fucking Facebook" - in a goodhearted way (which makes a change from Cybernat twattery).
It was increasingly clear that people were going vote tactically for the Tories in fear of the SNP. We didn't get squeezed despite the obvious squeeze. We didn't go backwards, we went forwards.
And what hinterland do we now have? A pyrrhic victory for Logan, the SNP crushed so that it fits into a minibus. No need to fear the SNP any longer. Their pitch was that "If the SNP wins a majority of seats in this election in Scotland, the Scottish government will embark on negotiations with the UK government to run the democratic wishes of people in Scotland into a reality."
The people of Scotland have spoken. Emphatically. And rejected independence. Massively. On the terms offered by the SNP.
No need to vote Tory in fear any longer. My campaign for Holyrood starts now.
It is. She is a broken woman. Everything she has ever wanted politically has crumbled into dust.
I would walk across broken glass to vote against her, but have some compassion.
Oh come on. That's a cheeky running joke from Farron based on Truss's Lib Dem past, and nothing more. If you're a politician and you're affected by that, you're most certainly in the wrong career.
At every election, a load of political careers end, or are at least very significantly set back. If you're giving a victory speech, you can be magnanimous etc. But you want to win and it means your opponent losing by definition. Truss or any other ex-MP can go and have a nice holiday and get on with the rest of their lives. Worse things happen at sea and it's the nature of the business.
Plus the old girl will always be an ex-PM, albeit with an asterisk. That'll get her a damned sight better table at the restaurant than, say, an unsuccessful Lib Dem ex-leader at the nadir of the party's fortunes.
I can have compassion for Truss up to a point. Her removal as PM was brutal and her successor did no better, and initially she handled it with some impressive dignity.
But rebranding as some kind of economic guru with Trumpian tendencies was her own choice later and compounded her humiliation.
I look for her thoughts on the deep state voters of SW Norfolk who cost her her state, in a conspiracy concocted amongst the turnips
It is. She is a broken woman. Everything she has ever wanted politically has crumbled into dust.
I would walk across broken glass to vote against her, but have some compassion.
Oh come on. That's a cheeky running joke from Farron based on Truss's Lib Dem past, and nothing more. If you're a politician and you're affected by that, you're most certainly in the wrong career.
At every election, a load of political careers end, or are at least very significantly set back. If you're giving a victory speech, you can be magnanimous etc. But you want to win and it means your opponent losing by definition. Truss or any other ex-MP can go and have a nice holiday and get on with the rest of their lives. Worse things happen at sea and it's the nature of the business.
Plus the old girl will always be an ex-PM, albeit with an asterisk. That'll get her a damned sight better table at the restaurant than, say, an unsuccessful Lib Dem ex-leader at the nadir of the party's fortunes.
I can have compassion for Truss up to a point. Her removal as PM was brutal and her successor did no better, and initially she handled it with some impressive dignity.
But rebranding as some kind of economic guru with Trumpian tendencies was her own choice later and compounded her humiliation.
Her successor did a fair bit better actually. How would the Conservatives have faired in the election had she still been leader? I'd say probably worse but we'll never know.
She was a terrible PM in her 45 days. Sunak will go down as a PM who was neither especially good or especially bad.
So 121 Con MPs - which means 41 needed to make the Leadership Final 2. (40 would guarantee 2nd=).
@HYUFD - have you done an analysis yet re who will make the Final?
Has Braverman got the numbers?
I think Barclay or Cleverly are the likeliest contenders to be next leader, I don't think Tory MPs will put Braverman in the last 2 and her former campaign manager Steve Barclay lost his seat
Expect members to be outraged if the final choice does not include a Braverman type, even if not herself.
And expect Farage to chunter along to the whole contest reminding them all whose voters they need to win back and from whom.
(Actually they need centrist votes back too, lots of them, but centrist MPs won't try to entice Tories to jump ship).
I wonder if these Hamas Independents will formally set themselves up as a party? Ahead of ReFuk and Green in seat numbers if they do.
So anyone who opposes the genocide is a Hamas supporter? You disgusting twat
I think calling it a genocide is going down the same line as calling people Hamas supporters. I think Israel has probably gone too far, but I also don't know what else they could do. There are still hostages in Gaza. The Gazan leadership would drop a nuke on Israel in seconds if they could.
"what else they could do"?
Not target the civilian population.
Gaza obviously matters to a significant segment of the population, not by any means all Muslim, but I think there is more to it than that. There is a feeling (very much like Red wall Reform voters) that Labour has taken them for granted for far too long and failed to invest in their communities. The two have a lot in common.
Given the vilification of Corbyn as an antisemite by the gutter press and other Tory shills, I don't think Labour's position is hard to understand.
So I've struck two private bets with friends in the world of politics/polling.
Labour to be polling in fourth place with a BPC registered pollster in a Westminster VI poll in the next 18 months (excluding any by Matt Goodwin)
Nigel Farage will not serve a full term as MP.
The morning after the 2019 GE I struck a very great bet with one of these people that Boris Johnson's tenure as PM would be shorter than Dave's.
What's your thinking on Farage? Standing down to take up a post with Trump? Being thrown out? Something else?
Farage gets bored quickly but he was an MEP for about 20 years so he does have a track record of sticking things out if it suits his less than selfless agenda...
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
It is time.
Build those phone masts.
Its not just phone masts, its everything.
Houses, phone masts, factories, shops, roads, rails, cycle paths, reservoirs, sewage treatment, you name it we need to stop NIMBYs from blocking it.
Exactly. We cannot have a system where forgetting to carry out a badger survey (or whatever) sends an entire planning application back months or even years. It’s insane.
Dan Davies has been banging on about this, how we’ve created a rentier professional class who’s job it is to oppose development in this country: https://backofmind.substack.com/p/slight-return
So 121 Con MPs - which means 41 needed to make the Leadership Final 2. (40 would guarantee 2nd=).
@HYUFD - have you done an analysis yet re who will make the Final?
Has Braverman got the numbers?
I think Barclay or Cleverly are the likeliest contenders to be next leader, I don't think Tory MPs will put Braverman in the last 2 and her former campaign manager Steve Barclay lost his seat
Barclay is so dull though? For me, Hunt is head and shoulders above what’s left. And the likes of Braverman need to be sat on, heavily.
So I've struck two private bets with friends in the world of politics/polling.
Labour to be polling in fourth place with a BPC registered pollster in a Westminster VI poll in the next 18 months (excluding any by Matt Goodwin)
Nigel Farage will not serve a full term as MP.
The morning after the 2019 GE I struck a very great bet with one of these people that Boris Johnson's tenure as PM would be shorter than Dave's.
What's your thinking on Farage? Standing down to take up a post with Trump? Being thrown out? Something else?
All of those.
I don't think he will enjoy being an MP.
He will get maybe one question a year at PMQs.
On major statements, he will get called to ask question after the Tories, Lib Dems, SNP, Greens etc, he won't be able to grandstand as he could as an MEP.
I suspect he will clash with most Speakers as he will not follow Parliamentary rules.
Declaring/earning outside income will be an issue too.
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
I agree. The hard question is what sort of planning reform. There are a lot of new MPs who have been voted in on a vague platform of "things can only get better", and are not going to be energised at the thought of telling their electors there's a 5,000-house estate going in over the road.
(For what it's worth, I think the sane way forward is really aggressive zoning in the "grey belt" and Labour appears to be making some tentative moves towards that. But saying it is easy, pushing it forward is harder.)
Good to see all the counts done overnight now. I recall only a few elections ago there was talk of moving to counting the following day and indeed many counts were done so.
👍
We're lucky in that we're a country where it's practical to have the election, count the votes, and (most of the time...) know the winner by six the next morning. No mucking about, job jobbed. IMV the longer the election process - I'm looking at you, US Presidential elections - the more the chances of chicanery and chaos.
Many elections officials would love it to be next day, its a right hassle to go overnight. Lesser elections are often done that way now. Buy it is of genuine worth not just for drama.
So 121 Con MPs - which means 41 needed to make the Leadership Final 2. (40 would guarantee 2nd=).
@HYUFD - have you done an analysis yet re who will make the Final?
Has Braverman got the numbers?
I think Barclay or Cleverly are the likeliest contenders to be next leader, I don't think Tory MPs will put Braverman in the last 2 and her former campaign manager Steve Barclay lost his seat
Barclay is so dull though? For me, Hunt is head and shoulders above what’s left. And the likes of Braverman need to be sat on, heavily.
Hunt wouldn't get to the last 2 with MPs and doesn't have a hope of winning the members vote. He should have a big role in the new Leaders Shadow Cabinet though. Braverman will also need to be in it, all wings of the party present
So I've struck two private bets with friends in the world of politics/polling.
Labour to be polling in fourth place with a BPC registered pollster in a Westminster VI poll in the next 18 months (excluding any by Matt Goodwin)
Nigel Farage will not serve a full term as MP.
The morning after the 2019 GE I struck a very great bet with one of these people that Boris Johnson's tenure as PM would be shorter than Dave's.
What's your thinking on Farage? Standing down to take up a post with Trump? Being thrown out? Something else?
Farage gets bored quickly but he was an MEP for about 20 years so he does have a track record of sticking things out if it suits his less than selfless agenda...
Yes - that would be my thinking too. Although him basically being awol seems quite likely. I imagine that Reform will have some splits. Possibly into 4 parties.
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
34% of the vote isn't much of a mandate, despite the large majority. I expect Labour to be timid to the extreme given that losing 2-3% to the Tories begins to look like a hung parliament, especially as tactical voting unwinds now that the Tories aren't in government or works against Labour as the incumbents.
So 121 Con MPs - which means 41 needed to make the Leadership Final 2. (40 would guarantee 2nd=).
@HYUFD - have you done an analysis yet re who will make the Final?
Has Braverman got the numbers?
I think Barclay or Cleverly are the likeliest contenders to be next leader, I don't think Tory MPs will put Braverman in the last 2 and her former campaign manager Steve Barclay lost his seat
Expect members to be outraged if the final choice does not include a Braverman type, even if not herself.
And expect Farage to chunter along to the whole contest reminding them all whose voters they need to win back and from whom.
(Actually they need centrist votes back too, lots of them, but centrist MPs won't try to entice Tories to jump ship).
Conservative party members and old Etonians are two groups from whom a lengthy period of silence would be welcome. Neither £39 a year nor £16,000 a term should buy the right to bring the country to its knees.
It's fun to see the commentary on the SNP swing all the way back the other way. After 2015 there were shrill voices complaining of a one party state (when they got 50% of the vote). Now it's talk of annihilation (and they're heading for about 30% of the vote I think).
One of the reasons I don't like FPTP is the unjust seat distributions (honestly, 56/59 seats was insane), but the other aspect is how exaggerated the effects, and therefore the reactions, are.
None of this will dent the Labour joy or the SNP pain -- a huge number of seats have changed hands. But in the cold light of day it's looking like SNP have a decent base to build back on. If they can keep their fucking fingers out of tills/young boys/expenses/jail!
ANME: final update. We did it, we shifted the Tories out! Big thanks to Rochdale for helping with that. I'm certain with a non-existent campaign from the Lib Dems the Tories would have clung on. Finishing last shouldn't be a mark of shame, it was a small contribution but a big effect. I'm delighted we have an MP who isn't Conservative or Reform.
Future: my vote is immediately back in play, and the rules have changed. The Tories have had the kicking they so richly deserved and needed. My priority is probably going to be back to Europe again next election. Immediate favourites will be Lib Dem and SNP, but we'll see how policy stances develop. I'm much less likely to vote tactically next time, but we're going to have to keep an eye on whether the Tories lurch rightwards. I could vote again to keep them out if they're still a shitshow or worse. But I think they'll turn towards the light.
How do you see yourself voting with your Holyrood votes in 2026?
(Tell me to feck off if you don't want to answer, heck tell me to feck off if you do want to answer.)
I think the Holyrood election of 2026 could re-energise Scottish nationalism.
I don't know. A lot depend on how Labour will govern. My priority is Europe, and the noises haven't been positive from Labour on that but I'll wait and see.
We do have two votes, so I could do what I've done in the past and split them, e.g. Lib Dem and SNP. Labour and Green are in play, Conservative unlikely unless they really show some Starmer-esque vigour in heading hard for the centre and make positive Euro-friendly noises. Reform and Alba, never never never. There'll probably be some other minor parties around that won't impinge much on my consciousness.
Thanks.
George Osborne said something last night, which I think is unsustainable and not very democratic.
He said the only way we will get Indyref2 is if we have a Lab/SNP coalition at Westminster.
I think if we see 2011 style Holyrood results/2015 Westminster results in Scotland that's going to cause issues for the Union.
On last night's results the SNP will lose power at Holyrood in 2026 too and Sarwar will become FM
I know we’ve said that Labour’s vote was incredibly efficient, but this chart (from the Electoral Reform Society, natch) really nails that:
Tough chart. I know all systems have positives and negatives so I don't subscribe to the view the current one is without merit, but I do still we can do better.
They're lining people up under Union Flag brollies in Downing Street but SKS hasn't gone in to see Charlie yet. They could be standing there in the rain for another hour like lemons.
So, let's look at Labour's foreign policy and defence in-tray: first up, a Nato summit. An excellent chance for Starmer to demonstrate his govt's commitment to the Alliance & remaining a nuclear weapon state. But UK position in Nato no longer what it was... 1/
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
I agree. The hard question is what sort of planning reform. There are a lot of new MPs who have been voted in on a vague platform of "things can only get better", and are not going to be energised at the thought of telling their electors there's a 5,000-house estate going in over the road.
(For what it's worth, I think the sane way forward is really aggressive zoning in the "grey belt" and Labour appears to be making some tentative moves towards that. But saying it is easy, pushing it forward is harder.)
I think we have to make passing this planning applications /patriotic/: we need a sustained PR campaign from all sides spelling it out to the oldies (it’s mostly the oldies) that by opposing planning applications that they are screwing over their own children & the entire country simultaneously.
Ripping control away from local authorities is probably also going to have to be part of this - which probably means more centralisation in the short term sadly. Ideally I think you’d give planning authority to regional authorities that roughly corresponded to the independent economic areas of the country - the hinterlands around the cities.
My French colleague has asked if he can come and claim political asylum in the UK after this weekend's likely deuxieme tour results. He understands that under Starmer he won't be sent to Rwanda if he tries. I suggested he arrives by Eurostar rather than small boat, especially given the current windy conditions in the channel.
So 121 Con MPs - which means 41 needed to make the Leadership Final 2. (40 would guarantee 2nd=).
@HYUFD - have you done an analysis yet re who will make the Final?
Has Braverman got the numbers?
I think Barclay or Cleverly are the likeliest contenders to be next leader, I don't think Tory MPs will put Braverman in the last 2 and her former campaign manager Steve Barclay lost his seat
Barclay is so dull though? For me, Hunt is head and shoulders above what’s left. And the likes of Braverman need to be sat on, heavily.
People called Starmer and Davey dull. Now one is PM and the other is some kind of aspiring youtube daredevil or something?
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
It is time.
Build those phone masts.
Its not just phone masts, its everything.
Houses, phone masts, factories, shops, roads, rails, cycle paths, reservoirs, sewage treatment, you name it we need to stop NIMBYs from blocking it.
I shall believe, when I see it, that a left wing government, headed by a barrister, will cut down the thickets of legal challenges that can be mounted towards new development, on grounds of conservation, climate change, badgers, and everything that can be used by pressure groups, to stop things from happening.
"This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast."
Not to mention all the newly-minted Labour and Lib Dem MP's who will vigorously support development anywhere but in their own constituencies.
No, I was just pointing out the stupidity of your comment that to have concern about the Palestinians made you a Hamas supporter.
Your language is the language of Netanyahu which should make you reflect.
Having concerns for the Palestinians is fine. Having concerns for the Jews in Israel is fine.
When you put one of those as your top priority, in this country, over everything else - then it's very easy to appear a Hamas or Bibi supporter.
And I see a worrying amount of people whose 'concern' for the Palestinians appears to trump everything else that is happening in the world. And yes, I would class many of those people as Hamas supporters.
I do hope these new 'independent' MPs will look after the interests of all their constituents, even Jewish ones.
Both the Orthodox and Liberal Synagogues in Leicester are in Adam's Constituency, and he has condemned antisemitism. He deserves the benefit of the doubt, for the present at least.
My French colleague has asked if he can come and claim political asylum in the UK after this weekend's likely deuxieme tour results. He understands that under Starmer he won't be sent to Rwanda if he tries. I suggested he arrives by Eurostar rather than small boat, especially given the current windy conditions in the channel.
His Majesty will not accede to french demands for clemency
The Truss loss was well deserved and see Tim Shipman said good riddance to her influence in the party. She looked quite shell shocked to me.
Mogg going was sweet music. His malign influence and arrogance was a big part of the Tory defeat in the last years.
It's a shame IDS was allowed to cling on, we need him out of the party. I suspect if he continues with his acceptance speech attitude then he won't get much attention inside the party.
Pity Suella is still there.
Glad Cleverly and Hunt still around. We shall see about how Kemi and Priti work out.
I hope the party is more concerned about the Lib dem surge in the South in there core area than the Red wall.
I fear the party will double down on nimbyism to woo the Southern seats back, especially if the planning reforms actually amount to something.
So I've struck two private bets with friends in the world of politics/polling.
Labour to be polling in fourth place with a BPC registered pollster in a Westminster VI poll in the next 18 months (excluding any by Matt Goodwin)
Nigel Farage will not serve a full term as MP.
The morning after the 2019 GE I struck a very great bet with one of these people that Boris Johnson's tenure as PM would be shorter than Dave's.
What's your thinking on Farage? Standing down to take up a post with Trump? Being thrown out? Something else?
Farage gets bored quickly but he was an MEP for about 20 years so he does have a track record of sticking things out if it suits his less than selfless agenda...
Yes - that would be my thinking too. Although him basically being awol seems quite likely. I imagine that Reform will have some splits. Possibly into 4 parties.
Tice is apparently cool with playing second fiddle to Farage, but Andersons shtick is the tell it as it is guy. He's a time bomb for them.
If green and Reform votes had been in line with previous elections where there was a two party squeeze (3 and 2% respectively), the vote shares would have been:
There’s a weird delirium seizing Tories this morning. Worst election result ever but they can sniff an opening with Starmer’s low vote share. “This is the shittest landslide ever” one says “We can get back in five years”. If this view is widespread it may change who they pick for leader
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
I agree. The hard question is what sort of planning reform. There are a lot of new MPs who have been voted in on a vague platform of "things can only get better", and are not going to be energised at the thought of telling their electors there's a 5,000-house estate going in over the road.
(For what it's worth, I think the sane way forward is really aggressive zoning in the "grey belt" and Labour appears to be making some tentative moves towards that. But saying it is easy, pushing it forward is harder.)
The bigger problem with planning reform is the rampant non-compliance from the water companies in England. It might be counter-intuitive, but if you want to bring the public along with you, you need to enforce planning rules even as you loosen them. Fund LA planning departments properly.
The other problem is being clear about what you want to achieve. On housing, the optimal outcome for developers (maximising profit) is not the same as the government (maximising the number of new homes in areas of housing pressure). Whatever reforms you make should try to align these two better.
Of course, the easiest (and historically proven) way to do it is council housing, where you skewer both obstructions at the same time.
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
34% of the vote isn't much of a mandate, despite the large majority. I expect Labour to be timid to the extreme given that losing 2-3% to the Tories begins to look like a hung parliament, especially as tactical voting unwinds now that the Tories aren't in government or works against Labour as the incumbents.
To remain in power, Labour need to build homes and generate economic (or wage) growth.
Keir Starmer's plan for his first 100 days in government
- Diplomatic push at Nato and EPC meeting - Planning reform blitz - Push for private investment - Lifting ban on onshore wind - Sue Gray has "20 bills" for King's Speech
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
I agree. The hard question is what sort of planning reform. There are a lot of new MPs who have been voted in on a vague platform of "things can only get better", and are not going to be energised at the thought of telling their electors there's a 5,000-house estate going in over the road.
(For what it's worth, I think the sane way forward is really aggressive zoning in the "grey belt" and Labour appears to be making some tentative moves towards that. But saying it is easy, pushing it forward is harder.)
I think we have to make passing this planning applications /patriotic/: we need a sustained PR campaign from all sides spelling it out to the oldies (it’s mostly the oldies) that by opposing planning applications that they are screwing over their own children & the entire country simultaneously.
Ripping control away from local authorities is probably also going to have to be part of this - which probably means more centralisation in the short term sadly. Ideally I think you’d give planning authority to regional authorities that roughly corresponded to the independent economic areas of the country - the hinterlands around the cities.
I'm not a fan of the idea of regional bodies but we need desperate action. I did like the idea of less ability to hold back significant projects with greater ability to hold back minor ones as a compromise, though frankly as a yimby I'd prefer less option in any case.
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
It is time.
Build those phone masts.
Its not just phone masts, its everything.
Houses, phone masts, factories, shops, roads, rails, cycle paths, reservoirs, sewage treatment, you name it we need to stop NIMBYs from blocking it.
I shall believe, when I see it, that a left wing government, headed by a barrister, will cut down the thickets of legal challenges that can be mounted towards new development, on grounds of conservation, climate change, badgers, and everything that can be used by pressure groups, to stop things from happening.
Not to mention all the newly-minted Labour and Lib Dem MP's who will vigorously support development anywhere but in their own constituencies.
Labour has got 200 new MPs who are going to want to keep their constituents happy and every one of those new MPs will have constituents who will want their new MP to block something being built.
I'd love to believe Starmer can sort this out, but lets face it we've heard this kind of talk before.
And right now I think come November all Starmer's plans are going to be torpedoed by the re-election of Trump precipitating a defence crisis.
Dignified resignation speech from Rishi, he also confirmed he would resign as PM
Morning Mr HYUFD. You must be feeling a bit relieved this morning. Could have worse for the Conservatives in Essex.
Could have been better - Priti could have lost!
My thoughts exactly!
And IDS, who deserved to lose after his arrogant hubristic victory speech. Every other person can see that he was bloody lucky to be running against two Labour candidates who split the vote exactly equally, so he gave us a lecture about how it was all down to his own brilliance and hard work.
He even went on to criticise some of his colleagues for "thinking it was all about being in Westminster" - effectively telling his losing colleagues that if only they'd been as good an MP as he is, they wouldn't have lost. I bet they really appreciate that.
I didn’t see that; on your report I shan’t look it up!
No, I was just pointing out the stupidity of your comment that to have concern about the Palestinians made you a Hamas supporter.
Your language is the language of Netanyahu which should make you reflect.
Having concerns for the Palestinians is fine. Having concerns for the Jews in Israel is fine.
When you put one of those as your top priority, in this country, over everything else - then it's very easy to appear a Hamas or Bibi supporter.
And I see a worrying amount of people whose 'concern' for the Palestinians appears to trump everything else that is happening in the world. And yes, I would class many of those people as Hamas supporters.
No. Absolutely not. You don't get to accuse people of being terrorist supporters just because you feel they are too concerned about casualties among Palestine civilians.
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
I agree. The hard question is what sort of planning reform. There are a lot of new MPs who have been voted in on a vague platform of "things can only get better", and are not going to be energised at the thought of telling their electors there's a 5,000-house estate going in over the road.
(For what it's worth, I think the sane way forward is really aggressive zoning in the "grey belt" and Labour appears to be making some tentative moves towards that. But saying it is easy, pushing it forward is harder.)
The bigger problem with planning reform is the rampant non-compliance from the water companies in England. It might be counter-intuitive, but if you want to bring the public along with you, you need to enforce planning rules even as you loosen them. Fund LA planning departments properly.
The other problem is being clear about what you want to achieve. On housing, the optimal outcome for developers (maximising profit) is not the same as the government (maximising the number of new homes in areas of housing pressure). Whatever reforms you make should try to align these two better.
Of course, the easiest (and historically proven) way to do it is council housing, where you skewer both obstructions at the same time.
Good point on enforcement. Many areas it has suffered and it builds a lot of cynicism.
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
34% of the vote isn't much of a mandate, despite the large majority. I expect Labour to be timid to the extreme given that losing 2-3% to the Tories begins to look like a hung parliament, especially as tactical voting unwinds now that the Tories aren't in government or works against Labour as the incumbents.
To remain in power, Labour need to build homes and generate economic (or wage) growth.
That means fixing planning...
Fixing planning will push voters into the blue column though and seeing the effects of growth from planning reform will take 4-6 years so if they do it tomorrow most of the benefit won't be seen only the building sites that people loathe.
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
34% of the vote isn't much of a mandate, despite the large majority. I expect Labour to be timid to the extreme given that losing 2-3% to the Tories begins to look like a hung parliament, especially as tactical voting unwinds now that the Tories aren't in government or works against Labour as the incumbents.
To remain in power, Labour need to build homes and generate economic (or wage) growth.
That means fixing planning...
Yep, cruising is not an option. It's do stuff, or be killed at the polls next time; this country's in a state.
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
34% of the vote isn't much of a mandate, despite the large majority. I expect Labour to be timid to the extreme given that losing 2-3% to the Tories begins to look like a hung parliament, especially as tactical voting unwinds now that the Tories aren't in government or works against Labour as the incumbents.
To remain in power, Labour need to build homes and generate economic (or wage) growth.
That means fixing planning...
Fixing planning will push voters into the blue column though and seeing the effects of growth from planning reform will take 4-6 years so if they do it tomorrow most of the benefit won't be seen only the building sites that people loathe.
I wonder if these Hamas Independents will formally set themselves up as a party? Ahead of ReFuk and Green in seat numbers if they do.
So anyone who opposes the genocide is a Hamas supporter? You disgusting twat
I think calling it a genocide is going down the same line as calling people Hamas supporters. I think Israel has probably gone too far, but I also don't know what else they could do. There are still hostages in Gaza. The Gazan leadership would drop a nuke on Israel in seconds if they could.
"what else they could do"?
Not target the civilian population.
I don't believe that they have. I believe that Hamas use the Gazans as human shields.
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
It is time.
Build those phone masts.
Its not just phone masts, its everything.
Houses, phone masts, factories, shops, roads, rails, cycle paths, reservoirs, sewage treatment, you name it we need to stop NIMBYs from blocking it.
I shall believe, when I see it, that a left wing government, headed by a barrister, will cut down the thickets of legal challenges that can be mounted towards new development, on grounds of conservation, climate change, badgers, and everything that can be used by pressure groups, to stop things from happening.
"This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast."
Not to mention all the newly-minted Labour and Lib Dem MP's who will vigorously support development anywhere but in their own constituencies.
There will be pushback instantly. It will be very easy to push it into the weeds, tinker, and blame the Tories.
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
It is time.
Build those phone masts.
Its not just phone masts, its everything.
Houses, phone masts, factories, shops, roads, rails, cycle paths, reservoirs, sewage treatment, you name it we need to stop NIMBYs from blocking it.
I shall believe, when I see it, that a left wing government, headed by a barrister, will cut down the thickets of legal challenges that can be mounted towards new development, on grounds of conservation, climate change, badgers, and everything that can be used by pressure groups, to stop things from happening.
Not to mention all the newly-minted Labour and Lib Dem MP's who will vigorously support development anywhere but in their own constituencies.
Labour has got 200 new MPs who are going to want to keep their constituents happy and every one of those new MPs will have constituents who will want their new MP to block something being built.
I'd love to believe Starmer can sort this out, but lets face it we've heard this kind of talk before.
And right now I think come November all Starmer's plans are going to be torpedoed by the re-election of Trump precipitating a defence crisis.
That last is the most alarming. Now hopefully, Starmer can rise to the challenge. The problem with defence/foreign affairs is that you rarely get credit for handling them effectively, but get them wrong, and the electorate will turn on you with a vengeance.
In truth, there is nothing more important for a government than security, but prioritising defence expenditure over schools, hospitals, and benefits, wins you no votes.
Keir Starmer's plan for his first 100 days in government
- Diplomatic push at Nato and EPC meeting - Planning reform blitz - Push for private investment - Lifting ban on onshore wind - Sue Gray has "20 bills" for King's Speech
It is. She is a broken woman. Everything she has ever wanted politically has crumbled into dust.
I would walk across broken glass to vote against her, but have some compassion.
Oh come on. That's a cheeky running joke from Farron based on Truss's Lib Dem past, and nothing more. If you're a politician and you're affected by that, you're most certainly in the wrong career.
At every election, a load of political careers end, or are at least very significantly set back. If you're giving a victory speech, you can be magnanimous etc. But you want to win and it means your opponent losing by definition. Truss or any other ex-MP can go and have a nice holiday and get on with the rest of their lives. Worse things happen at sea and it's the nature of the business.
Plus the old girl will always be an ex-PM, albeit with an asterisk. That'll get her a damned sight better table at the restaurant than, say, an unsuccessful Lib Dem ex-leader at the nadir of the party's fortunes.
I can have compassion for Truss up to a point. Her removal as PM was brutal and her successor did no better, and initially she handled it with some impressive dignity.
But rebranding as some kind of economic guru with Trumpian tendencies was her own choice later and compounded her humiliation.
Her successor did a fair bit better actually. How would the Conservatives have faired in the election had she still been leader? I'd say probably worse but we'll never know.
She was a terrible PM in her 45 days. Sunak will go down as a PM who was neither especially good or especially bad.
History will be kinder to him than people are now, but you don't get this kind of result even in bad times through being middling.
Is bigjohnowls on? Happy to donate £50 to charity of his choice - I offered a bet Starmer would outperform Corbyn... he was right!
Corbyn 262 seats Starmer 412 seats!
He's absolutely deluded about Corbyn. He did get votes but every vote he got for Labour generated more than one vote for Conservative. Never in the history of politics has such a loser got such a reputation for success.
Also, I would not be surprised if a lot of railway contracts/franchises hand back the keys early.
Why?
Because they will be ending any way and a lot of them are close to going bust.
I thought the franchises were a cash cow, or is the taxpayer going to take on a lot of loss-making businesses?
IIRC a lot of them are not very good businesses to be in because the DfT set the amount of subsidy the taxpayer provides and the fare that can be charged and the services level that must be provided, and they set them all at a level that didn't leave much scope for the franchisees to make a profit unless super optimistic passenger growth assumptions turned up. But those economics don't apply the same way to the state because it doesn't subsidise itself.
I think the wins by independents fighting on Gaza, the close shaves in some other seats, and the toxicity of the campaigns particularly in seats with female MPs like Jess Phillips and Shabana Mahmood is just as if not a bigger story as Reform in this election
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
34% of the vote isn't much of a mandate, despite the large majority. I expect Labour to be timid to the extreme given that losing 2-3% to the Tories begins to look like a hung parliament, especially as tactical voting unwinds now that the Tories aren't in government or works against Labour as the incumbents.
To remain in power, Labour need to build homes and generate economic (or wage) growth.
That means fixing planning...
Fixing planning will push voters into the blue column though and seeing the effects of growth from planning reform will take 4-6 years so if they do it tomorrow most of the benefit won't be seen only the building sites that people loathe.
And its that sort of short-termism that leads to decline.
Boris knew the need for planning reform and had moderate plans, which Theresa May and others rebelled against leading to them being shelved. Now the Tories are out of office and Theresa May and others seats are no longer Tory.
Either Starmer grasps the nettle and fixes problems, or he'll fail. There is no alternative.
If he fails, he deserves to lose. If he grasps the opportunity to address issues, he'll secure a well-deserved legacy.
Hertsmere (won surprisingly easily by the Conservatives), saw both the Lib Dems and Labour make gains in the local elections of 2021 and 2023, simply by campaigning against any new development. If you're the Labour MP for Hitchin, or NE Herts., or Welwyn Hatfield, are you going to piss off all the local well-heeled, articulate pressure groups who oppose development?
Starmer and Reeves have to go for planning reform, to go for growth, and they have a mandate for it.
If they do, they'll get growth and they'll have done the right thing.
If they don't, the UK will continue to languish.
I agree. The hard question is what sort of planning reform. There are a lot of new MPs who have been voted in on a vague platform of "things can only get better", and are not going to be energised at the thought of telling their electors there's a 5,000-house estate going in over the road.
(For what it's worth, I think the sane way forward is really aggressive zoning in the "grey belt" and Labour appears to be making some tentative moves towards that. But saying it is easy, pushing it forward is harder.)
I think we have to make passing this planning applications /patriotic/: we need a sustained PR campaign from all sides spelling it out to the oldies (it’s mostly the oldies) that by opposing planning applications that they are screwing over their own children & the entire country simultaneously.
Ripping control away from local authorities is probably also going to have to be part of this - which probably means more centralisation in the short term sadly. Ideally I think you’d give planning authority to regional authorities that roughly corresponded to the independent economic areas of the country - the hinterlands around the cities.
I'm not a fan of the idea of regional bodies but we need desperate action. I did like the idea of less ability to hold back significant projects with greater ability to hold back minor ones as a compromise, though frankly as a yimby I'd prefer less option in any case.
It's why I think we need to look at zoning, which hasn't as such ever been a big thing in the UK (Local Plans get close to it but not close enough). Effectively you say "this area is designated for houses, this is the design code to which the houses shall be built, and any planning application will automatically be approved as long as it conforms to the design code".
It would require the Government to come up with a decent national design code, which they are in theory capable of doing but which they would probably screw up.
There’s a weird delirium seizing Tories this morning. Worst election result ever but they can sniff an opening with Starmer’s low vote share. “This is the shittest landslide ever” one says “We can get back in five years”. If this view is widespread it may change who they pick for leader
The Tory belief in their divine right to rule as the natural party of power is both unshakable and remarkable, given they were inches from being pushed into third place. We'll be back in our rightful place in less than five years.
I just had a look at my Linkedin feed. There are a lot of 'professionals' engaging in a bit of defamation/slander against Reform UK, calling them racist, against multiculturalism, etc. They are doing this on the false assumption that everyone reading their feed agrees with them and taking the absence of criticism as validation for their views. But actually a lot of the people reading these outbursts voted for Reform UK and many more will be sympathetic to them.
The facts are 1 in 7 of the electorate voted reform, 1 in 3 of the electorate voted labour. It is not some mad fascist fringe movement. Reform UK are a mainstream party representing a significant quantum of public opinion.
So I've struck two private bets with friends in the world of politics/polling.
Labour to be polling in fourth place with a BPC registered pollster in a Westminster VI poll in the next 18 months (excluding any by Matt Goodwin)
Nigel Farage will not serve a full term as MP.
The morning after the 2019 GE I struck a very great bet with one of these people that Boris Johnson's tenure as PM would be shorter than Dave's.
What's your thinking on Farage? Standing down to take up a post with Trump? Being thrown out? Something else?
Farage gets bored quickly but he was an MEP for about 20 years so he does have a track record of sticking things out if it suits his less than selfless agenda...
Strasbourg was a nice gravy train for Farage surely; Westminster, not so much.
If I were Starmer, I'd pass some legislation to ban MPs from receiving outside earnings from the 2025-26 tax year on. Let MPs have a 50% one-off pay-rise in compensation.
If you don't like it as an MP, resign and we'll have some by-elections alongside next year's locals.
Comments
It was increasingly clear that people were going vote tactically for the Tories in fear of the SNP. We didn't get squeezed despite the obvious squeeze. We didn't go backwards, we went forwards.
And what hinterland do we now have? A pyrrhic victory for Logan, the SNP crushed so that it fits into a minibus. No need to fear the SNP any longer. Their pitch was that "If the SNP wins a majority of seats in this election in Scotland, the Scottish government will embark on negotiations with the UK government to run the democratic wishes of people in Scotland into a reality."
The people of Scotland have spoken. Emphatically. And rejected independence. Massively. On the terms offered by the SNP.
No need to vote Tory in fear any longer. My campaign for Holyrood starts now.
Mostly I'm a freelance writer, but if this 'Prime Minister' gig needs a hardworking individual, I'm willing to give it a crack.
Plenty of trees to stick the thingmo on, though.
Has there been an official acknowledgement that Sion Simon was proven right after a short 17 years?
Obviously the Tories will say no, that would mean accepting a right wing rival as a permanent force, but it helps prevent Reform support backsliding by keeping the distinction.
George Osborne said something last night, which I think is unsustainable and not very democratic.
He said the only way we will get Indyref2 is if we have a Lab/SNP coalition at Westminster.
I think if we see 2011 style Holyrood results/2015 Westminster results in Scotland that's going to cause issues for the Union.
Houses, phone masts, factories, shops, roads, rails, cycle paths, reservoirs, sewage treatment, you name it we need to stop NIMBYs from blocking it.
She was a terrible PM in her 45 days. Sunak will go down as a PM who was neither especially good or especially bad.
I do think Labour will get this through, they've got literally no opposition to it.
And expect Farage to chunter along to the whole contest reminding them all whose voters they need to win back and from whom.
(Actually they need centrist votes back too, lots of them, but centrist MPs won't try to entice Tories to jump ship).
They can be judged on their record from now on.
Dan Davies has been banging on about this, how we’ve created a rentier professional class who’s job it is to oppose development in this country: https://backofmind.substack.com/p/slight-return
I don't think he will enjoy being an MP.
He will get maybe one question a year at PMQs.
On major statements, he will get called to ask question after the Tories, Lib Dems, SNP, Greens etc, he won't be able to grandstand as he could as an MEP.
I suspect he will clash with most Speakers as he will not follow Parliamentary rules.
Declaring/earning outside income will be an issue too.
(For what it's worth, I think the sane way forward is really aggressive zoning in the "grey belt" and Labour appears to be making some tentative moves towards that. But saying it is easy, pushing it forward is harder.)
Probably the most efficient Labour and Libdem votes, least efficient Conservative vote ever?
Like a dystopian version of 1997. Which, given the intervening time, is apt.
He’s not gonna be available for game vs Netherlands and if they proceed to the semi finals.
Turkish Federation has appealed to CAS.
↪️ Bellingham will be available, Demiral will not be available.
So, let's look at Labour's foreign policy and defence in-tray: first up, a Nato summit. An excellent chance for Starmer to demonstrate his govt's commitment to the Alliance & remaining a nuclear weapon state. But UK position in Nato no longer what it was... 1/
https://x.com/markurban01/status/1809166806331847065
Ripping control away from local authorities is probably also going to have to be part of this - which probably means more centralisation in the short term sadly. Ideally I think you’d give planning authority to regional authorities that roughly corresponded to the independent economic areas of the country - the hinterlands around the cities.
"This country is planted thick with laws, from coast to coast."
Not to mention all the newly-minted Labour and Lib Dem MP's who will vigorously support development anywhere but in their own constituencies.
Mogg going was sweet music. His malign influence and arrogance was a big part of the Tory defeat in the last years.
It's a shame IDS was allowed to cling on, we need him out of the party. I suspect if he continues with his acceptance speech attitude then he won't get much attention inside the party.
Pity Suella is still there.
Glad Cleverly and Hunt still around. We shall see about how Kemi and Priti work out.
I hope the party is more concerned about the Lib dem surge in the South in there core area than the Red wall.
I fear the party will double down on nimbyism to woo the Southern seats back, especially if the planning reforms actually amount to something.
The unknown 4th guy coukd do anything.
Harris 2.14-2.2
Biden 3.3-3.4
If green and Reform votes had been in line with previous elections where there was a two party squeeze (3 and 2% respectively), the vote shares would have been:
Lab: 37.5%
Con: 36.0%
Hung parliament.
https://x.com/shippersunbound/status/1809142817769300291
The other problem is being clear about what you want to achieve. On housing, the optimal outcome for developers (maximising profit) is not the same as the government (maximising the number of new homes in areas of housing pressure). Whatever reforms you make should try to align these two better.
Of course, the easiest (and historically proven) way to do it is council housing, where you skewer both obstructions at the same time.
That means fixing planning...
I'd love to believe Starmer can sort this out, but lets face it we've heard this kind of talk before.
And right now I think come November all Starmer's plans are going to be torpedoed by the re-election of Trump precipitating a defence crisis.
TERRIBLE START. Already lost me.
That's how I describe mine.
In truth, there is nothing more important for a government than security, but prioritising defence expenditure over schools, hospitals, and benefits, wins you no votes.
https://x.com/David_Goodhart/status/1809155007259799583
Regardless, this will be up there with the all-time landslides.
https://x.com/soniasodha/status/1809178056868630587
Boris knew the need for planning reform and had moderate plans, which Theresa May and others rebelled against leading to them being shelved. Now the Tories are out of office and Theresa May and others seats are no longer Tory.
Either Starmer grasps the nettle and fixes problems, or he'll fail. There is no alternative.
If he fails, he deserves to lose. If he grasps the opportunity to address issues, he'll secure a well-deserved legacy.
It would require the Government to come up with a decent national design code, which they are in theory capable of doing but which they would probably screw up.
The facts are 1 in 7 of the electorate voted reform, 1 in 3 of the electorate voted labour. It is not some mad fascist fringe movement. Reform UK are a mainstream party representing a significant quantum of public opinion.
If I were Starmer, I'd pass some legislation to ban MPs from receiving outside earnings from the 2025-26 tax year on. Let MPs have a 50% one-off pay-rise in compensation.
If you don't like it as an MP, resign and we'll have some by-elections alongside next year's locals.