We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.
The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.
Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.
The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.
Brexit is done on that poll for most Tory voters and that was who Boris focused on as he was elected PM of a Conservative majority government.
It isn't done for most Labour and LD voters as they want Starmer to start to restore free movement and dilute Brexit.
It isn't done for most Reform voters as they want an even harder Brexit than Boris had with the RN stopping the boats and a hard border in Northern Ireland
I assume that Tory voters in that poll is the 20-something percent who voted Tory in 2024, so it's unlikely that a majority of 2019 Tory voters would agree that Brexit was done.
Those that don't want an even harder Brexit as I said, blocking up the channel tunnel, razor wire on Kent beaches, naval ships in the channel, checkpoints at the Irish border and tariffs on EU imports etc but they are mainly Reform voters now not Tories
Does anyone really want to block up the Channel Tunnel? Anyone?
Rees Mogg wanted to build a wall in the English Channel
Didn't Alan Clark want to put a self-destruct mechanism in the Channel Tunnel, in case of invasion?
To be fair to the bigoted old hypochondriac, he did live 3 miles from the tunnel entrance.
I think he was right to do so - I certainly hope there's an easy way to block it up/destroy it if the worst happens. We are constantly told of the menace of Putin to the continent - are we going to wait for him to arrive at St Pancras?
The plans for the 1960s Tunnel proposal were supposed to include demolition chambers - cavities next to the tunnel that would ordinarily be empty. In time of war, an explosive charge (nuclear?) would be placed in it.
IIRC someone asked the question if such a cavity or cavities exist for the current Channel tunnel. And didn’t get an answer.
It will surprise nobody to learn this, but I believe the whole purpose of a European rail network and its importance to the project is the potential to subdue a discontented populace. We might find such ideas quaint, but in the former Soviet bloc it's a very real concept.
Errr
The European rail network is almost entirely about high speed passenger only.
We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
No it wasn't.
Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.
The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.
It feels like one of those things like hybrid working that will actually end up being absolutely great for middle class office workers, especially bosses, but will widen the gap between them and those that further down the chain that need to be in person for their job e.g. bus drivers are still going to be doing the same shifts and not being doing it as WFH.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I don't remember Thatcher hammering pensioners and whacking up taxes on those with assets and entrepreneurs with higher CGT? Starmer has also overseen the biggest jailing of nationalist far right activists in modern history
Nor did Thatcher impose VAT on private school fees and remove all hereditary peers from the Lords
Howe increased VAT from 8 to 15% as soon as they got in in 1979.
If Reeves hiked it from 20 to the Irish rate of 23% all our fiscal holes would be filled.
Labour and its supporters have decided VAT is "regressive". Never quite understood it myself, given someone on a low income is mostly buying VAT-free or lower-rate things (housing, basic food, bills).
The one to watch is employers NI.
I think putting that up is bonkers compared to tweaking corporation tax by an equivalent amount to raise the necessary revenue. Employers NI is a tax on jobs - corp tax is after all is said and done and a tax on the final profit.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
I hope so.
Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.
In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
Interesting fact: Foot got a higher share of the voting age public than Starmer did.
I have to say having a go at Harris for working in McDonalds when she was at university seems particularly stupid. It shows she's got work ethic and doesn't mind doing whatever it takes to pay her own way. Saying it's not transparent of her to leave it off her CV is ridiculous, I haven't put my uni job at Topman on my CV since probably 2008 after I got my first actual job I binned it.
Presumably an indication that these guys just never had to do jobs like that.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
I hope so.
Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.
In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
Interesting fact: Foot got a higher share of the voting age public than Starmer did.
Starmer won nearly twice as many seats as Foot did.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
I hope so.
Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.
In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
Interesting fact: Foot got a higher share of the voting age public than Starmer did.
Starmer won nearly twice as many seats as Foot did.
Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.
The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.
That all sounds fantastic. I think the bit that is oft missed in this equation, however, is that if you’re on say a 35 hour week, just look at how your work days look if you’re spreading the extra 7 hours out evenly among the other 4 days.
I’m not generally knocking it, because I support the idea that as long as an employer and worker can come to an arrangement that suits them we shouldn’t be wedded to traditional 9-5 arrangements. I think you should certainly have the right to request it. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for an employer to think about how that works within its business model either.
We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
No it wasn't.
Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
I would argue that has far more to do with. Being able to access pension pots at 55. And the pandemic. Which made people reassess.
I have to say having a go at Harris for working in McDonalds when she was at university seems particularly stupid. It shows she's got work ethic and doesn't mind doing whatever it takes to pay her own way. Saying it's not transparent of her to leave it off her CV is ridiculous, I haven't put my uni job at Topman on my CV since probably 2008 after I got my first actual job I binned it.
There's a reason that the Republican campaign is doing stupid and desperate things right now...
Talking of stupid and desperate.
Trump pushes his disgusting, misogynist lie that moms in Minnesota and other blue states can legally murder their babies after they're born. Sick shit. https://x.com/atrupar/status/1829257751807041853
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
I hope so.
Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.
In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
And the Lib Dems + Green even without the sundry lefty independents got far more votes than Reform this year.
It's way too early to call the next election (and FWIW I think Starmer has done OK so far). There are five main dynamics at play I think:
1. Reform/Tory. Labour benefits as long as previous Tories stick with Reform. 2. Labour/Conservative. The traditional battleground is less important than it used to be in terms of voters but not seats (see point 1) 3. Conservative/Lib Dem in South of England. Tories will find it hard to dislodge the new occupants of their seats I suspect and they aren't putting any effort into trying right now. This dynamic will be relatively impervious to any Labour unpopularity. 4. Labour/SNP in Scotland. Doesn't directly benefit the Conservatives. 5. Labour/Greens and Gaza. The mirror of the Tory/Reform dynamic. Labour are fortunate that this phenomenon is mostly in their previously strongest seats and has a limited effect. Gaza may disappear as an issue by next election.
In general these dynamics aren't particularly useful to the Conservatives, except dynamic (1) against Reform. Parties associated with Nigel Farage have a habit of self combusting. The Tories may strike lucky. Otherwise I think it will be hard work. Reform voters don't particularly like the Conservatives either.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
It's really common for PMs, and indeed holders of many public offices, to update the art in their office. I'm quite sure all his Tory predecessors did so (possibly excluding Truss simply due to lack of time).
There is a specific office in DCMS for it, and the art either goes to a public museum, or in some cases storage.
I'd have thought this may well turn up in the National Portrait Gallery soon. It's a credible piece of art, with a very notable subject.
I do think it's important to challenge the conspiracy theory bullshit that goes around implying this is unusual or involves an incinerator. It's a public asset, and you're now a hell of a lot more likely to be able to see it than when it was in a private office.
We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
Complicated enough to be completely beyond the Tories for the last decade. What makes you think they’ve learned anything ?
We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
Complicated enough to be completely beyond the Tories for the last decade. What makes you think they’ve learned anything ?
And how can they show competence at these things from opposition?
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
It's really common for PMs, and indeed holders of many public offices, to update the art in their office. I'm quite sure all his Tory predecessors did so (possibly excluding Truss simply due to lack of time).
There is a specific office in DCMS for it, and the art either goes to a public museum, or in some cases storage.
I'd have thought this may well turn up in the National Portrait Gallery soon. It's a credible piece of art, with a very notable subject.
I do think it's important to challenge the conspiracy theory bullshit that goes around implying this is unusual or involves an incinerator. It's a public asset, and you're now a hell of a lot more likely to be able to see it than when it was in a private office.
This reminds me of the drama we have every time a new US President moves into the White House and we have to hear about where they’ve put the dratted Churchill bust.
Let people have whatever artwork makes them happy on their walls. I don’t think Starmer should be obliged to be gazed down upon by the Sainted Margaret, as if he has to pay due veneration to her like the statue of the Virgin at Lourdes.
FPT, Gareth Dennis shouldn't be mouthing off to journos outside his area of expertise, especially when employed bh a supplier to NR. Quite right he got put in his place. Hendy's reaction maybe a little extreme, but the anger was justified to an extent.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I don't remember Thatcher hammering pensioners and whacking up taxes on those with assets and entrepreneurs with higher CGT? Starmer has also overseen the biggest jailing of nationalist far right activists in modern history
Nor did Thatcher impose VAT on private school fees and remove all hereditary peers from the Lords
Howe increased VAT from 8 to 15% as soon as they got in in 1979.
If Reeves hiked it from 20 to the Irish rate of 23% all our fiscal holes would be filled.
Labour and its supporters have decided VAT is "regressive". Never quite understood it myself, given someone on a low income is mostly buying VAT-free or lower-rate things (housing, basic food, bills).
The one to watch is employers NI.
Extend it to apply to workers as well as employees?
We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
Complicated enough to be completely beyond the Tories for the last decade. What makes you think they’ve learned anything ?
And how can they show competence at these things from opposition?
You can make a case from opposition, if you're disciplined and develop a coherent policy agenda.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
It's really common for PMs, and indeed holders of many public offices, to update the art in their office. I'm quite sure all his Tory predecessors did so (possibly excluding Truss simply due to lack of time).
There is a specific office in DCMS for it, and the art either goes to a public museum, or in some cases storage.
I'd have thought this may well turn up in the National Portrait Gallery soon. It's a credible piece of art, with a very notable subject.
I do think it's important to challenge the conspiracy theory bullshit that goes around implying this is unusual or involves an incinerator. It's a public asset, and you're now a hell of a lot more likely to be able to see it than when it was in a private office.
I think if Blair (or maybe Cameron) had taken down Thatchers portrait then fair enough... But for a total pygmy and puritan creep like Keith to do it... Leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
No it wasn't.
Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
I would argue that has far more to do with. Being able to access pension pots at 55. And the pandemic. Which made people reassess.
No, there's 1.5m more people on sickness benefits. There aren't 1.5m more sick people, it's just easier for them to get more money with UC than it was on the old system so they do it. There are millions of people who are dishonest and will take advantage any system that is easy to abuse. UC is extremely porous and those dishonest people have learned how to game the system.
FPT, Gareth Dennis shouldn't be mouthing off to journos outside his area of expertise, especially when employed bh a supplier to NR. Quite right he got put in his place. Hendy's reaction maybe a little extreme, but the anger was justified to an extent.
Not quite - he was repeating the official ORR statement about Euston which hasn't been improved as multiple people have mentioned.
Worse the idea that you won't give company X work because they employ person Y is simply childish and the letter shows how stupid Lord Hendy is in actually writing the threat down.
The only reason why there isn't a stupidly expensive employment tribunal coming is that Gareth hadn't been employed by this firm for 2 years so he can't take it to a tribunal.
We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
No it wasn't.
Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
I would argue that has far more to do with. Being able to access pension pots at 55. And the pandemic. Which made people reassess.
No, there's 1.5m more people on sickness benefits. There aren't 1.5m more sick people, it's just easier for them to get more money with UC than it was on the old system so they do it. There are millions of people who are dishonest and will take advantage any system that is easy to abuse. UC is extremely porous and those dishonest people have learned how to game the system.
Maybe. Or maybe it's the total collapse of any kind of support system? If you want folk to work why not just ask them what they can/can't do?
While some quibble about smoking in beer gardens and let's face it, it isn't a hill (or garden) on which I would choose to die, much more serious matters don't get the attention they deserve:
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
I don't disagree, but my goodness they made heavy weather of it over the last 14 years...
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
It's really common for PMs, and indeed holders of many public offices, to update the art in their office. I'm quite sure all his Tory predecessors did so (possibly excluding Truss simply due to lack of time).
There is a specific office in DCMS for it, and the art either goes to a public museum, or in some cases storage.
I'd have thought this may well turn up in the National Portrait Gallery soon. It's a credible piece of art, with a very notable subject.
I do think it's important to challenge the conspiracy theory bullshit that goes around implying this is unusual or involves an incinerator. It's a public asset, and you're now a hell of a lot more likely to be able to see it than when it was in a private office.
I think if Blair (or maybe Cameron) had taken down Thatchers portrait then fair enough... But for a total pygmy and puritan creep like Keith to do it... Leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
Thatcher's various legacies have dominated our politics for far too long. Way past time to move on. Plenty of better places to hang it.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
I hope so.
Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.
In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
Foot was challenging from four years in Opposition. Con was defending from 14 years in government.
Indeed. The Conservatives could go even further backwards from here, just as Labour did in 1984. The equivalent election you are referring to, 1979, saw Labour with a 37% vote share, rather more than the Tories' 24% in July
We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
No it wasn't.
Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
I would argue that has far more to do with. Being able to access pension pots at 55. And the pandemic. Which made people reassess.
No, there's 1.5m more people on sickness benefits. There aren't 1.5m more sick people, it's just easier for them to get more money with UC than it was on the old system so they do it. There are millions of people who are dishonest and will take advantage any system that is easy to abuse. UC is extremely porous and those dishonest people have learned how to game the system.
Maybe. Or maybe it's the total collapse of any kind of support system? If you want folk to work why not just ask them what they can/can't do?
That's what ESA was about, UC is a one size fits all solution and it doesn't work.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
The first Tory leadership ballot is next Wednesday. Hadn't realised it would be upon us so quickly.
This is only the first stage to whittle down to the four contenders who will then compete at party conference. Then there'll be another stage of MP voting to select the final two for the member's ballot.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
I hope so.
Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.
In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
Foot was challenging from four years in Opposition. Con was defending from 14 years in government.
Indeed. The Conservatives could go even further backwards from here, just as Labour did in 1984. The equivalent election you are referring to, 1979, saw Labour with a 37% vote share, rather more than the Tories' 24% in July
Reeves' decision to axe the WFA is the masterstroke that will save the Tory party at the next election, and consequently preserve the duopoly that both main parties rely on.
The first Tory leadership ballot is next Wednesday. Hadn't realised it would be upon us so quickly.
Really? It's felt like an eternity, where there is effectively no opposition. I can't quite understand why they couldn't just herd the parliamentary party into a conference centre and whittle it two to the last two in succession of votes in half a day, then get the member vote done in under a month. If they'd done that a week after the election they would have the new leader in place now.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
I hope so.
Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.
In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
Foot was challenging from four years in Opposition. Con was defending from 14 years in government.
Indeed. The Conservatives could go even further backwards from here, just as Labour did in 1984. The equivalent election you are referring to, 1979, saw Labour with a 37% vote share, rather more than the Tories' 24% in July
Reeves' decision to axe the WFA is the masterstroke that will save the Tory party at the next election, and consequently preserve the duopoly that both main parties rely on.
You think so? The fiscal black hole isn't £22 billion. That's a convenient fiction for Labour who want a big number but not TOO big a number. Whoever won the election was going to raise taxes significantly. We all knew that. WFA means testing is a tinkering and not something most people feel very strongly about hence expressed support for the measure in polls.
People turned away from the Conservatives because they could collapse in the street and not be picked up by an ambulance or be treated. If it's still the case in five years Labour will lose the election for that reason.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
We laugh, but he has seemed to me to p*ss off a sizeable chunk of people in a very short space of time. I find him oddly charmless and rather prickly.
He can probably afford to p*ss people off, if he delivers meaningful results. But the jury will be out on that one for some time.
Remember, I've always said this will be a one term government, despite the landslide.
I said it first! Before the election.
Got pilloried on here for it.
Yes, Starmer’s/Labour’s ratings are heading one way.
The issue is, who of Conservatives, Lib Dem’s, Reform benefits.
Until the Tories have a leader in place it will be difficult for them to benefit and if it's not Cleverly or Tugendhat then I think they will struggle to win people over from Labour, though Jenrick and Kemi will find it easier to win Reform voters back.
The problem is how do the Conservatives attract voters from one side without shipping roughly as many voters on the other side. Sunak never solved that, which is why he spent so much of the time looking like a rabbit caught in headlights.
This has nothing to do with whether Starmer is a good PM or not, or whether any of the Conservative options would be better. It's just that the shape of the party system is much harder for the Conservatives to navigate than it has been in the past.
It's quite simple. The Conservatives reduce and control immigration, whilst delivering economic competence, low tax and investing in infrastructure, industry and business in the north. Without corruption or bad behaviour.
This stuff isn't that complicated.
While that sounds simple, it also needs to be weighed against the current expenditure budget which has skyrocketed under the Tories since 2019. A proper Tory government needs to put a 10 year brake on current spending including stuff like the state pension and other welfare. We will never be in a position as a country to invest in infrastructure if the priority is for current expenditure.
Scrap the Triple Lock. It's the only way.
And universal credit, move back to JSA and ESA. It was a better system.
No it wasn't.
Under that system we had record labour force participation and almost 80% employment for working age people. Since UC has rolled out more people have become economically inactive by choice and live on benefits. The system has design flaws and needs to be scrapped.
I would argue that has far more to do with. Being able to access pension pots at 55. And the pandemic. Which made people reassess.
No, there's 1.5m more people on sickness benefits. There aren't 1.5m more sick people, it's just easier for them to get more money with UC than it was on the old system so they do it. There are millions of people who are dishonest and will take advantage any system that is easy to abuse. UC is extremely porous and those dishonest people have learned how to game the system.
Steady there. It's more likely that those people have always been sick, and it's only now that it is being recognised in the UC assessment system.
It's not an easy system to play, and the Scottish equivalent of DWP for devolved benefits sees much higher rates of uptake than equivalent benefits in England - that's simply because Social Security Scotland isn't as tough on people.
Indeed, analysis of DWP benefits routinely finds much lower rates of uptake than you might expect, saving the Treasury billions each year. Consider pension credit.
Even then, less than 50% of the increase in people on health-related benefits is a new phenomenon. Most of the increase is in line with long-trends in physical and mental health, and we are now converging with that trend rather than diverging.
(Check out all the OBR analysis of this. It's excellent).
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of new people to just do this?
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
Bastards. We want heart attacks and strokes! What do we want?
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With health approaching 50% of public spending, this is the kind of thing we need to be doing. As a share, it's nearly doubled since 1997.
I think most people overweight know they are overweight, and they know its bad for their health, they don't need somebody coming in and weighing them. The question is what they do about it. Are they going to start giving out ozempic shots like sweeties?
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
Bastards. We want heart attacks and strokes! What do we want?
The problems are
1) Logistics. How many people will it cost to do this on a useful scale?
2) Delay. The benefit will be felt later but the cost incurred now.
3) Scope. Is this something the government should be doing at all?
4) Priority. Is there something more important that the Govt should be doing?
The priorities for the UK are (or should be IMHO)
1) Repositioning the NHS to deal with the care of the approx 15 million pensioners who will die over the next 15 years
2) Work out how to tax the rich in a world where the rich can move at a moment's notice
3) Work out how to wean the economy off constant cheap labour imported from overseas
4) Work out how to cope in a multipolar world full of bad countries and bad billionaires
5) How does the nation state cope in a world where people's loyalties are to online abstractions and identity groups.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,
“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other? Both have just gone up in price loads. Bottle of 500ml Coke Cola / Coke Zero / Diet Coke is now often ~£2, where as it used to be ~£1. Weirdly energy drinks (which can't be good for you) now often are cheaper than the traditional soft drinks.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
Perhaps the Keir Starmer as Mr Brittas joke was closer to the truth than we realised.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
Perhaps the Keir Starmer as Mr Brittas joke was closer to the truth than we realised.
Certainly for a man who kept saying growth, growth, growth, everything will be focused on growth, appears to keep making choices that might have other benefits, but definitely won't be boosting short term growth.
I will also just point out that all these clever Labour wheezes that are being rolled out should have been in a manifesto they won power under 7 weeks ago.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,
“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before. I don't know the marketing rationale for equal pricing.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,
“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.
"modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
I don't know if the price rise is the sugar tax or the fact that inflation bust the cost through £1 that it was held at for years due to inflation and we know (as CEOs have said this on earning calls) that they have used this period of very high inflation to maximise profits.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,
“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.
"modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
Experts, what do they know eh
All they've done is obtain survey data and had a look at consumption before and after.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,
“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.
"modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
Experts, what do they know eh
When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And survey data for food consumption is notoriously unreliable.
And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,
“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.
"modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
Experts, what do they know eh
When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,
“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.
"modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
Experts, what do they know eh
When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I saw that earlier. All I'll say is... it's up to him. BUT, given he doesn't own Downing St. and he doesn't own that painting, I hope it's being stored somewhere for safe keeping so when he's booted out on his arse in 2029, the next PM can restore it to it's rightful place....
Of course it's being stored somewhere for safekeeping.
I hope so.
Mrs Thatcher won her elections with 43.9%, 42.4% and 42.2% of the vote and Keith "won" his election with... checks... 33.7% of the vote... He's not fit to lick her boots, honestly!
Did Sir Maggie ever win over 400 seats like Sir Keir?
That was purely a one off anomaly with REF splitting the Con vote.
In any other election Lab would have lost with their 2024 vote share... As they will in 2029. 👌
Michael Foot won 28% of the vote, way more than Conservative current standing despite his longest suicide note.
Foot was challenging from four years in Opposition. Con was defending from 14 years in government.
Indeed. The Conservatives could go even further backwards from here, just as Labour did in 1984. The equivalent election you are referring to, 1979, saw Labour with a 37% vote share, rather more than the Tories' 24% in July
Reeves' decision to axe the WFA is the masterstroke that will save the Tory party at the next election, and consequently preserve the duopoly that both main parties rely on.
Nah. The pensioners mostly vote Tory already, the better off ones know they don't need it, and the cohort of four or five years of upcoming pensioners won't miss what they never had
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,
“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.
"modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
Experts, what do they know eh
When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,
“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.
"modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
Experts, what do they know eh
When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
"Participants are sampled throughout the year, such that in a typical month about 40 adults and 40 children participate"
Absolutely f##k all sample size for starters.
Well, you can't expect them to interview all 16,000 people in a single day.
They weren't doing any interviews themselves they were sampling from existing data from which there is only a total of 500 adults, 500 kids, but they were sampling 40. And as I say, food diaries / interviews are notoriously iffy. Plus the goalposts were shifting because of separate voluntary action by food producers.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Not really. All the drinks manufacturers* promptly took sugar out of their drinks, making them taste foul, and leaving the consumer with no virtually choice. As per usual punishing people like me (typical consumption - a couple of cans a month) for the benefit of people who eat at McDonald's twice a week.
Most of the studies around the real world effects are rubbish too, if not as bad as the one from the Scottish Government which tried to claim that the fall in alcohol consumption which occurred around the time minimum pricing was announced was a result of the policy, then glossed over the fact that there was no measurable effect when the policy was actually implemented.
Who thought banning smoking in the garden of pubs should be on the No 10 grid the day after telling the country in massively major speech that the economy is fucked and swinging by Germany to confirm young people will not be able to travel on visa any easier?
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
With what resources are they going to do this? Its not like GP surgeries and A&E are currently running at low levels of demand and absolutely no queues. Are they going to hire a load of people to just do this?
It's going to save money, you see. People will become fitter and healthier and it will reduce the burden on the NHS.
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
We are going to get a load of sin taxes on unhealthy food and drink aren't we.
The Conservative's sugar tax was found to be highly successful, so carrying on that proud tradition of evidence-based policy making.
Actually doing some reading, it is unclear. It is difficult to tease out was it the actual tax or was it that food companies agreed to reduce to reduce sugar in child targeted food / drinks e,g,
“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other?
On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before.
"modelled the estimated impact" - we all know how good modelling is....
Experts, what do they know eh
When it comes to mathematical modelling, recent evidence has shown us, often fuck all. And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
"Trends in free sugar consumption prior to the announcement of SDIL in April 2016 were used to estimate counterfactual scenarios of what would have happened if the SDIL had not been announced or come into force. "
In short, not only did they compare before and after, they also compared the actual data with a simulated counterfactual. I have difficulty accepting this, as they are comparing facts with their reckons of what would have happened otherwise. It's not wrong, it's that I'm not sure it's meaningful. I dislike comparsions that require a multiverse.
The upshot appears to be kids are now drinking more energy drinks than ever, so we have swapped sugary pop for excessive caffeine intake. In poorer places you can buy extra special gut rot stuff for < £1 at the Spar or Premier. Its like fags > vapes > Zyn, lung cancer to gum cancer.
WSJ is reporting that pilot error led to the loss of one of Ukraine's ten F-16 jets.
That would be unfortunate.
If it's the one reported yesterday, then the pilot died as well. RIP.
Apparently a non-combat loss.
Crap. War sucks, but the solution is more F-16s heading to Ukraine.
How many Spitfire pilots did we lose in WWII to non-combat incidents?
RIP.
Non combat losses are almost always right up there with combat losses.
It depends on the conflict, they certainly weren't in either of the Iraqs or in the Stan.
In the SMO, blue-on-blue is far more common than non-combat losses. AFM did an article on UAF losses in the March edition... 45 Fulcrum/Flanker losses, 30 shot down, 15 destroyed on the ground, 23 crew KIA. Of the 30 shoot downs, 9 were blue-on-blue!
The Ukrainian F-16 cadre were all first tour nuggets (they didn't retrain any Fulcrum/Flanker drivers) who are in a unit with no grey beards to guide them so there's going to be occasionally spectacular fuck ups. Shades of post WW2 GAF and F-104.
The upshot appears to be kids are now drinking more energy drinks than ever, so we have swapped sugary pop for excessive caffeine intake. In poorer places you can buy extra special gut rot stuff for < £1 at the Spar or Premier. Its like fags > vapes > Zyn, lung cancer to gum cancer.
There was a feature on NPR earlier about how US kids are drinking tons of energy drinks - so it's probably cultural rather than driven by taxation
This post is supported by you, the reader, and by EZFix consultants, working through technology to prepare businesses and consumers for the modern age. Find out more at...
"Suicide rates in England and Wales reach highest level since 1999 Samaritans charity calls on government to invest in suicide prevention as it has with smoking reduction Robert Booth"
Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.
The client media and their cheerleaders on PB have gone mad, quite mad.
It's right wing displacement activity.
The level of outward projection of anger onto Starmer/Labour is directly proportional to the intensity of the pitched battles being fought behind closed doors.
They're desperately trying to keep the lid on the tory leadership pressure cooker.
Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.
The client media and their cheerleaders on PB have gone mad, quite mad.
It's right wing displacement activity.
The level of outward projection of anger onto Starmer/Labour is directly proportional to the intensity of the pitched battles being fought behind closed doors.
They're desperately trying to keep the lid on the tory leadership pressure cooker.
The party is deciding.
Anthony Seldon, Truss at 10;
"She (Truss) was not the only one to claim the Thatcher mantle, in a Conservative Party that had lost its common sense of mission, Thatcher idolatry was almost the only shared belief."
Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.
One can only trust - or rather hope - that when Con MPs and their hench-people engage in Greco-Roman free-style wrestling with colleagues (or perhaps just themselves) in Westminster offices, broom closets, storage lockers, etc., etc., that they have the decency (and sobriety) to cover their obligatory portrait of Lady Thatcher. Possibly with a Union (ahem) Jack (ahem)?
The logic of the purple bit interests me. Is it that their paper readership is now primarily pensioners? Or that they're explicitly targeting this edition to catch the eye of wealthy pensioners (more likely to have a vote in the tory leadership election?)
I wanna know who it was who was furious and who the Mail contacted to confect outrage and brand the move "petty."
I might embarrass myself in the newsagents, tomorrow.
Minority view I know, but I’ve been pleasantly surprised by SKS in government. Early days, of course, but his focus appears to be on reform and improved efficiency rather than courting popularity. Very different to Blair in that respect and in a good way as far as I’m concerned.
It's good if they're prioritising balancing the books over being popular.
Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.
The client media and their cheerleaders on PB have gone mad, quite mad.
It's right wing displacement activity.
The level of outward projection of anger onto Starmer/Labour is directly proportional to the intensity of the pitched battles being fought behind closed doors.
They're desperately trying to keep the lid on the tory leadership pressure cooker.
The party is deciding.
Anthony Seldon, Truss at 10;
"She (Truss) was not the only one to claim the Thatcher mantle, in a Conservative Party that had lost its common sense of mission, Thatcher idolatry was almost the only shared belief."
(Chapter 2, 34:35, audiobook)
It's risible. The truth is Thatcher wasn't particularly good for the UK - or indeed the Tory party. Without this absurd veneration, succeeding governments - and that includes Blair/Brown - might have done something about the more negative aspects of her legacy, rather than leaving them unaddressed for three decades.
SKS reported to have removed a painting of Margaret Thatcher from 10 Downing Street study.
Later he realised it was a mirror.
I don't remember Thatcher hammering pensioners and whacking up taxes on those with assets and entrepreneurs with higher CGT? Starmer has also overseen the biggest jailing of nationalist far right activists in modern history
Thatcher broke the link between state pensions and earnings in 1980 as one of the first things she did.
Then it was on a double lock of the higher of inflation or average earnings increase.
I read that the weekend strikes by ASLEF on LNER have been called off, as the dispute has been settled.
It's amazing how effective constructive talks (as well as sensible pay offers) are in settling industrial disputes. I think all the disputes inherited by Labour have now been settled, though I may be wrong.
I don't think the GP work to rule is over.
Will anyone notice any difference? You couldn't get to see your GP before the work to rule.
The upshot appears to be kids are now drinking more energy drinks than ever, so we have swapped sugary pop for excessive caffeine intake. In poorer places you can buy extra special gut rot stuff for < £1 at the Spar or Premier. Its like fags > vapes > Zyn, lung cancer to gum cancer.
There was a feature on NPR earlier about how US kids are drinking tons of energy drinks - so it's probably cultural rather than driven by taxation
This post is supported by you, the reader, and by EZFix consultants, working through technology to prepare businesses and consumers for the modern age. Find out more at...
Yes, it turns out the main rival to Coca-Cola is not Pepsi but Red Bull. The government must crack down on energy drinks to drive up Coke sales, and coke sales!
Public speaking advice for politicians from Jimmy Carr (serious; Carr seems to be inventing a parallel career as self-help guru). https://www.youtube.com/shorts/UdZrdHYrji4
And if you are too busy for a 36-second video, Carr's advice is to speak at 92 beats per minute.
Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.
The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.
Thatcher is properly scary in the portrait. I wouldn't want her in my study either.
The client media and their cheerleaders on PB have gone mad, quite mad.
It's right wing displacement activity.
The level of outward projection of anger onto Starmer/Labour is directly proportional to the intensity of the pitched battles being fought behind closed doors.
They're desperately trying to keep the lid on the tory leadership pressure cooker.
The party is deciding.
Anthony Seldon, Truss at 10;
"She (Truss) was not the only one to claim the Thatcher mantle, in a Conservative Party that had lost its common sense of mission, Thatcher idolatry was almost the only shared belief."
(Chapter 2, 34:35, audiobook)
It's risible. The truth is Thatcher wasn't particularly good for the UK - or indeed the Tory party. Without this absurd veneration, succeeding governments - and that includes Blair/Brown - might have done something about the more negative aspects of her legacy, rather than leaving them unaddressed for three decades.
The de industrialisation of northern and midlands towns not being properly addressed being a major one.
I think it no coincidence that in just over 70% of the areas that rioted these were in highly deprived areas.
Same with the riots in Sheffield. Different people, different reason, same levels of deprivation.
Sure bringing Nissan to Washington was a success, but there’s very little else to show.
I hope SKS tries to address this. At the moment he seems to be continuity Sunak.
Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.
The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.
What’s the point ? Unless I’m missing something as it is Paywalled.
Anyone can demand this now.
They will pass legislation that will change the balance to be heavily in favour of the employee making it much harder for an employer to turn down a request for flexible working, including wishing to work their hours over 4 rather than 5 days. At the moment you can ask and the employer doesn't really need much of a reason to justify saying no.
Public speaking advice for politicians from Jimmy Carr (serious; Carr seems to be inventing a parallel career as self-help guru). https://www.youtube.com/shorts/UdZrdHYrji4
And if you are too busy for a 36-second video, Carr's advice is to speak at 92 beats per minute.
I find Jimmy Carr not being Jimmy Carr the comedian a lot more interesting than cracking jokes about what he has done to your mum.
Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.
The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.
Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.
The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.
Comments
Workers are to be given new rights to demand a four-day week in a law planned for this autumn.
The Telegraph understands the system of “compressed hours”, which lets an employee work their contracted week’s hours in four days rather than five, will be included in the package of new rights for workers.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2024/08/29/workers-to-be-given-new-rights-to-demand-four-day-week/
It reminds us all why we dumped the Tories in the bin 8 weeks ago.
StatsForLefties Aug 29, 2024 · 1:06 PM UTC
The European rail network is almost entirely about high speed passenger only.
Which is useless for military purposes.
I’m not generally knocking it, because I support the idea that as long as an employer and worker can come to an arrangement that suits them we shouldn’t be wedded to traditional 9-5 arrangements. I think you should certainly have the right to request it. I don’t think it’s unreasonable for an employer to think about how that works within its business model either.
Trump pushes his disgusting, misogynist lie that moms in Minnesota and other blue states can legally murder their babies after they're born. Sick shit.
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1829257751807041853
Erm...
1. Reform/Tory. Labour benefits as long as previous Tories stick with Reform.
2. Labour/Conservative. The traditional battleground is less important than it used to be in terms of voters but not seats (see point 1)
3. Conservative/Lib Dem in South of England. Tories will find it hard to dislodge the new occupants of their seats I suspect and they aren't putting any effort into trying right now. This dynamic will be relatively impervious to any Labour unpopularity.
4. Labour/SNP in Scotland. Doesn't directly benefit the Conservatives.
5. Labour/Greens and Gaza. The mirror of the Tory/Reform dynamic. Labour are fortunate that this phenomenon is mostly in their previously strongest seats and has a limited effect. Gaza may disappear as an issue by next election.
In general these dynamics aren't particularly useful to the Conservatives, except dynamic (1) against Reform. Parties associated with Nigel Farage have a habit of self combusting. The Tories may strike lucky. Otherwise I think it will be hard work. Reform voters don't particularly like the Conservatives either.
There is a specific office in DCMS for it, and the art either goes to a public museum, or in some cases storage.
I'd have thought this may well turn up in the National Portrait Gallery soon. It's a credible piece of art, with a very notable subject.
I do think it's important to challenge the conspiracy theory bullshit that goes around implying this is unusual or involves an incinerator. It's a public asset, and you're now a hell of a lot more likely to be able to see it than when it was in a private office.
What makes you think they’ve learned anything ?
Let people have whatever artwork makes them happy on their walls. I don’t think Starmer should be obliged to be gazed down upon by the Sainted Margaret, as if he has to pay due veneration to her like the statue of the Virgin at Lourdes.
If.
Worse the idea that you won't give company X work because they employ person Y is simply childish and the letter shows how stupid Lord Hendy is in actually writing the threat down.
The only reason why there isn't a stupidly expensive employment tribunal coming is that Gareth hadn't been employed by this firm for 2 years so he can't take it to a tribunal.
Or maybe it's the total collapse of any kind of support system?
If you want folk to work why not just ask them what they can/can't do?
Plenty of better places to hang it.
https://x.com/politlcsuk/status/1829273419285745885
NEW: The government is funding a new 'health MOT' in which the NHS will go into offices, pubs and building sites to weigh workers and measure their blood pressure to help prevent heart attacks and strokes
People turned away from the Conservatives because they could collapse in the street and not be picked up by an ambulance or be treated. If it's still the case in five years Labour will lose the election for that reason.
It's not an easy system to play, and the Scottish equivalent of DWP for devolved benefits sees much higher rates of uptake than equivalent benefits in England - that's simply because Social Security Scotland isn't as tough on people.
Indeed, analysis of DWP benefits routinely finds much lower rates of uptake than you might expect, saving the Treasury billions each year. Consider pension credit.
Even then, less than 50% of the increase in people on health-related benefits is a new phenomenon. Most of the increase is in line with long-trends in physical and mental health, and we are now converging with that trend rather than diverging.
(Check out all the OBR analysis of this. It's excellent).
They need to start a TV adverstising campaign: "If we all did 20 minutes of exercise 5 times a week, it would reduce the burden on our NHS. Do your bit for our NHS today!"
- 1) Logistics. How many people will it cost to do this on a useful scale?
- 2) Delay. The benefit will be felt later but the cost incurred now.
- 3) Scope. Is this something the government should be doing at all?
- 4) Priority. Is there something more important that the Govt should be doing?
The priorities for the UK are (or should be IMHO)- 1) Repositioning the NHS to deal with the care of the approx 15 million pensioners who will die over the next 15 years
- 2) Work out how to tax the rich in a world where the rich can move at a moment's notice
- 3) Work out how to wean the economy off constant cheap labour imported from overseas
- 4) Work out how to cope in a multipolar world full of bad countries and bad billionaires
- 5) How does the nation state cope in a world where people's loyalties are to online abstractions and identity groups.
They don't know what to do about these things“For example, the announcement and implementation of the sugar tax occurred alongside a programme of voluntary sugar reduction in other products commonly consumed by children, including biscuits, breakfast cereals, yoghurts, and confectionery. The authors have importantly highlighted that there are limitations to the interpretation of their study, which only shows an association rather than a causal link.”
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/jan/26/uk-sugar-tax-prevents-5000-cases-of-obesity-in-year-6-girls-annually
In my experience, there never seems to be any difference in prices in the shops between sugar free and full sugar soft drinks, so what is the motivating financial factor to choose one over the other? Both have just gone up in price loads. Bottle of 500ml Coke Cola / Coke Zero / Diet Coke is now often ~£2, where as it used to be ~£1. Weirdly energy drinks (which can't be good for you) now often are cheaper than the traditional soft drinks.
https://www.betfair.com/exchange/plus/politics/market/1.176878927
On your second point - that's not really the point; the drink, sugary or not, is now more expensive which puts people off. They were really quite cheap before. I don't know the marketing rationale for equal pricing.
I don't know if the price rise is the sugar tax or the fact that inflation bust the cost through £1 that it was held at for years due to inflation and we know (as CEOs have said this on earning calls) that they have used this period of very high inflation to maximise profits.
All they've done is obtain survey data and had a look at consumption before and after.
And the actual real world studies have said, no idea, but all this reduction in kids getting teeth pulled and fact kids foods / drinks don't have anywhere much sugar in seems relevant.
Absolutely f##k all sample size for starters.
Most of the studies around the real world effects are rubbish too, if not as bad as the one from the Scottish Government which tried to claim that the fall in alcohol consumption which occurred around the time minimum pricing was announced was a result of the policy, then glossed over the fact that there was no measurable effect when the policy was actually implemented.
*honourable exception - real Coke
In short, not only did they compare before and after, they also compared the actual data with a simulated counterfactual. I have difficulty accepting this, as they are comparing facts with their reckons of what would have happened otherwise. It's not wrong, it's that I'm not sure it's meaningful. I dislike comparsions that require a multiverse.
In the SMO, blue-on-blue is far more common than non-combat losses. AFM did an article on UAF losses in the March edition... 45 Fulcrum/Flanker losses, 30 shot down, 15 destroyed on the ground, 23 crew KIA. Of the 30 shoot downs, 9 were blue-on-blue!
The Ukrainian F-16 cadre were all first tour nuggets (they didn't retrain any Fulcrum/Flanker drivers) who are in a unit with no grey beards to guide them so there's going to be occasionally spectacular fuck ups. Shades of post WW2 GAF and F-104.
This post is supported by you, the reader, and by EZFix consultants, working through technology to prepare businesses and consumers for the modern age. Find out more at...
Samaritans charity calls on government to invest in suicide prevention as it has with smoking reduction
Robert Booth"
https://www.theguardian.com/society/article/2024/aug/29/suicide-rates-in-england-and-wales-reach-highest-level-since-1999
The level of outward projection of anger onto Starmer/Labour is directly proportional to the intensity of the pitched battles being fought behind closed doors.
They're desperately trying to keep the lid on the tory leadership pressure cooker.
The party is deciding.
"She (Truss) was not the only one to claim the Thatcher mantle, in a Conservative Party that had lost its common sense of mission, Thatcher idolatry was almost the only shared belief."
(Chapter 2, 34:35, audiobook)
I wanna know who it was who was furious and who the Mail contacted to confect outrage and brand the move "petty."
I might embarrass myself in the newsagents, tomorrow.
Or, maybe I won't.
The truth is Thatcher wasn't particularly good for the UK - or indeed the Tory party.
Without this absurd veneration, succeeding governments - and that includes Blair/Brown - might have done something about the more negative aspects of her legacy, rather than leaving them unaddressed for three decades.
Once it is all AI controlled, we are going to enter into the very, very interesting times.
https://x.com/kamilkazani/status/1829286484920123511
Then it was on a double lock of the higher of inflation or average earnings increase.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/UdZrdHYrji4
And if you are too busy for a 36-second video, Carr's advice is to speak at 92 beats per minute.
Anyone can demand this now.
https://x.com/alexwickham/status/1829237871842353435?s=61
https://www.theguardian.com/money/article/2024/aug/29/uk-graduates-struggle-job-market
I think it no coincidence that in just over 70% of the areas that rioted these were in highly deprived areas.
Same with the riots in Sheffield. Different people, different reason, same levels of deprivation.
Sure bringing Nissan to Washington was a success, but there’s very little else to show.
I hope SKS tries to address this. At the moment he seems to be continuity Sunak.
When businesses really start to embrace AI that impossible will turn to miracle in those fields.
The reality too many graduates in certain subject areas / job sectors. Government should be much more proactive in nudging.
No, they're not.
The amount of work doesn't go down.