Why is everyone making out they have loads of friends?
I only have four proper ones - two male and two female. They have 3 kids between them. So with my one that's 4 between 5.
Why is the birth-rate falling? Numerous reasons, obviously, but I'd highlight female emancipation. Women know it's a bum deal for them and with more empowerment are freer to turn it down.
I have lots of good friends. I count good friends as “people I can discuss anything with”. Sorry if that upends your view of the world
Ah ok. That includes me then, I suppose (although I didn't spot my initial on the list). One child - hardly shifting the dial, I know.
Certainly doesn’t include you
Oh. No soft-soaping there. Fair enough.
Well good luck with the next trip. It will hopefully take your mind off Keir Starmer for a short while anyway.
What are we on here? “Locals” perhaps. In the pb pub. Regulars
Why is everyone making out they have loads of friends?
I only have four proper ones - two male and two female. They have 3 kids between them. So with my one that's 4 between 5.
Why is the birth-rate falling? Numerous reasons, obviously, but I'd highlight female emancipation. Women know it's a bum deal for them and with more empowerment are freer to turn it down.
I have lots of good friends. I count good friends as “people I can discuss anything with”. Sorry if that upends your view of the world
Ah ok. That includes me then, I suppose (although I didn't spot my initial on the list). One child - hardly shifting the dial, I know.
Certainly doesn’t include you
Oh. No soft-soaping there. Fair enough.
Well good luck with the next trip. It will hopefully take your mind off Keir Starmer for a short while anyway.
That wasn’t meant meanly or personally, I just don’t count people I’ve met only online as “friends”
Indeed I’ve long thought there should be a new word for people like us. Internet personae you get to know well but never that well, and never for real
“Acquaintances” is too cold, and also doesn’t capture the internet aspect. “Friends” is too warm and intimate
A good friend is someone you can discuss anything with: sex, politics, health, love
A mere friend is someone whose company is enjoyable and you regularly - weekly or yearly - seek it out (and vice versa) but topics might be restricted
An acquaintance is “someone you have met more than once” but you’ve never had more than one head-to-head for the sake of it
What are we on here? “Locals” perhaps. In the pb pub. Regulars
My headline view is that the very big problems of demographic decline are rather smaller than the very big problems of untramelled demographic growth. So on a global scale there's that to be cheery about. But there's no doubt they are big problems. The wikipedia page on Chinese demographics has a little animation of their projected age/sex pyramid, which is quite startling.
The interesting thing is that demographic decline seems to happen everywhere in the developed or almost-developed world, regardless of local culture and politics. It's easy to blame housing costs, and housing costs are certainly a problem, but globally, poverty clearly doesn't stop people having children - all the really high birth rates are in really poor places. It's easy to blame the choices people make, but this seems to hold true across all cultures - and in any case, I think it's the case that people continue to want children in the same numbers they always did. The number of childless women who get to their mid-40s and wish they'd had children is about 90% of the number of childless women who get to their mid-40s. The number of people who wish they'd had more children is almost infinitely higher than the proportion who wish they'd had fewer.
There are all sorts of reasons why children don't happen, but my theory is that they have a common root: across all developed and almost-developed societies, there are many more old people than there used to be, and the more old people you have, the more resources you have to put into looking after that generation, so the less you have for the next generation. Low birth rates are to a large extent a feature of high birth rates a generation or two ago: the steeper the population growth a generation or two ago (e.g. East Asia), the steeper the decline now. This doesn't hold for sub-Saharan Africa because so few people make it to old age. But when they start doing so, we'll see the same pattern there.
At least you’ve done your bit!
I’ve managed two but without going into details it could/should have been several more
When I count my acquaintances it is striking how many are childless (and now going to stay that way). Sadly, I do think most of them regret it
Thanks! If I've achieved nothing else in my 49 years on the planet - and it's arguable that I haven't - I can at least take comfort that I've slightly repopulated the planet (sorry @SandyRentool !)
I have a group of friends from school with whom I am reasonably close - 11 of us: an unusually high 7 have gone down the straightforward married+2 kids (or 3, in or case) route, while the other four don't have kids of their own. There are some stepchildren in there and a shedload of dogs, but also a few regrets. Fertility rate of 1.36 (I know you're supposed to do it per mother and most of us are male, but I think it still works for comparison purposes). And we're the lucky middle class ones from unchaotic backgrounds who have made stable lives for ourselves and who can afford the choices we make.
I just crunched my numbers
My closest ten male friends (using their initials):
C: 2 H: 0 L: 0 T: 1 P: 1 P: 0 B: 0 G: 2 C: 0 P: 1
Me: 2
So 11 men have produced 9 kids. We are a bohemian bunch with a lot of chaos. But also fairly rich
We’re dying out!
In the next ten friends there’s one guy with 5 (doing his bit) but also several more childless - so the pattern holds
Doing the same exercise:
D - 2 J - 1 M - 2 A - 0 J - 0 A - 1 W - 0 B - 0 R - 1 Me - 2
So that's 9 kids for 10 blokes, I think there's probably 3 or 4 more left though as J with 0 and A with zero have only recently bought their own houses and W is getting married next summer and had said he wants to have at least one kid. Even with that as a group we're below the replacement rate because all but one of us are married or engaged.
My closest male friends
J - 2 C - 1 S - 0 A - 0 A -2 M - 0 Jc - 0 Jd - 0 Me - 0
So 9 have produced 5 kids.
Going through closest male friends from most kids & most likely to produce more
Ru - 3 (I think !) Brother - 3 JS - 2 Al - 2 VK - 2 P - 2 AB - 1 To - 1 Ch - 1 Me - 1 JR - 1 DG - 0 Jo - 0 Ste - 0 Stu - 0 Ro - 0 Ia - 0 An - 0 Mi - 0
Going through mine 19 from 19. DG is probably due 1, To possibly another. Who knows with Ru lol. So the TFR is perhaps going to be roughly 1 or just marginally over.
Live births in Chile fell from 90,000 to 70,000 in one half year. A 22% fall. Chile’s Total Fertility Rate is 0.88 - less than one child per woman. Chile is also the richest, most developed nation in S America. But it is running out of Chileans
East Asia is a horror show of course. Korea is dying. China is not far behind. I had no idea Thailand is similar - when you go there you see kids everywhere but that’s probably because I mainly go to youthful Bangkok
Schools worldwide will start closing down
Is this a problem, in the wider view of things? If so, why?
(It is a problem from a perpetual-growth viewpoint that our politicians and economists like. But from the viewpoint of the future of mankind?)
It's a problem whenever you have TFR significantly above or below 2.1 (assuming no migration), because you end up with a age distribution with peaks and troughs.
It wouldn't so matter so much at 1.9, 1.8, but when you're down at 1.3 like Scotland... It also depends on why. If it's because women (and indeed men) have more opportunities to work, travel and study, that's great. If it's because housing is so expensive that young couples don't feel they can't afford to have kids (or at least until you run into fertility issues) - terrible.
Housing is a big problem, but I suspect the former reason is much more important than we like to admit.
Yep. And this is definitely true for east Asia. Korea seems to have a particularly toxic mix of patriarchal society and highly educated women who rebel against this and go on fertility-strike
And housing like rabbit hutches doesn't help.
Also, can the family live easily and well on one salary?
The reaction to this question is always interesting, in the UK.
If only one partner in a couple worked full time house prices would also be cheaper
In theory, yes. I'm certainly convinced by the theory that having both parents working has driven house prices up. I think the reverse would take a long time to filter though, though, in which time I'm not sure how all those single income families would afford to live.
Certainly government could subsidise stay at home mothers more, as Meloni's government in Italy is now doing
Well it could do. But how would it afford that? Presumably by taxing the childless more. Which doesn't really help with them being able to start families. But it would certainly start to reduce house prices such that the next, much smaller generation, might be able to manage on one income.
You could also reduce spending on childcare for working mothers and spend it on stay at home mothers instead
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
He can't. Under UN rules (which is what Chagos is about), the islanders have to consulted on a change in nationality for the islands.
They are unanimous in not wanting to be Argentine.
Falklands Referendum 2013:
Yes to remain UK Overseas Territory: 1,513 (99.8%) No to remain UK Overseas Territory: 3 (0.2%)
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
The two situations are completely different. Just look at the history with respect to the inhabitants of the respective islands.
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
If Sir Keir gave the Falklands to Argentina white working class and lower middle class voters who voted for him in July would rush to the Tories and Reform so fast he wouldn't know what had hit him. Labour would lose every single redwall seat it won back in July and more. Not to mention the Sun and Mail would pour the biggest pile of shit over his head too.
Indeed the Argentine President Milei is not even focused on the Falklands now but growing the Argentine economy.
I disagree with the Chagos Islands decision on the risk it could become a Chinese military base but the population there has far less desire to stay a British overseas territory than the Falklands does
The majority of the white working class etc voters weren't around, or were only just around, when the Falklands war took place, 40 years ago.
Seems endemic in the culture of the Party. They need to get a handle on it ASAP. SKS has just prolonged it with his actions yesterday re-the Taylor Swift tickets.
Blair survived cash for fags. This is survivable but they need to draw a line under it.
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
I'd love to see the list of gift totals that all MPs received, not just Labour. What about the ministers last year?
Keir Starmer is the PM today. He has repaid £6000 so he;s been get an average of £500 a week in gifts Thats 20 pensioner homes that could be heated.
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
You certainly weren't aware that politicians of all parties accept and declare gifts and have done for decades. Only that ignorance could explain your daily performative pearl-clutching on here.
I am just about old enough to remember £200k of gold wallpaper, it is a shame these young whippersnappers have no recall of such events.
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
I'd love to see the list of gift totals that all MPs received, not just Labour. What about the ministers last year?
Keir Starmer is the PM today. He has repaid £6000 so he;s been get an average of £500 a week in gifts Thats 20 pensioner homes that could be heated.
So you are proposing that companies should bribe the PM by paying for x lots of winter fuel allowance?
Because otherwise I've not a clue what your argument is..
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Melania Trump about to unleash a bombshell memoir to be published on Tuesday that could depress evangelical and pro life Catholic turnout for Trump in November
Live births in Chile fell from 90,000 to 70,000 in one half year. A 22% fall. Chile’s Total Fertility Rate is 0.88 - less than one child per woman. Chile is also the richest, most developed nation in S America. But it is running out of Chileans
East Asia is a horror show of course. Korea is dying. China is not far behind. I had no idea Thailand is similar - when you go there you see kids everywhere but that’s probably because I mainly go to youthful Bangkok
Schools worldwide will start closing down
Is this a problem, in the wider view of things? If so, why?
(It is a problem from a perpetual-growth viewpoint that our politicians and economists like. But from the viewpoint of the future of mankind?)
It's a problem whenever you have TFR significantly above or below 2.1 (assuming no migration), because you end up with a age distribution with peaks and troughs.
It wouldn't so matter so much at 1.9, 1.8, but when you're down at 1.3 like Scotland... It also depends on why. If it's because women (and indeed men) have more opportunities to work, travel and study, that's great. If it's because housing is so expensive that young couples don't feel they can't afford to have kids (or at least until you run into fertility issues) - terrible.
Housing is a big problem, but I suspect the former reason is much more important than we like to admit.
Yep. And this is definitely true for east Asia. Korea seems to have a particularly toxic mix of patriarchal society and highly educated women who rebel against this and go on fertility-strike
And housing like rabbit hutches doesn't help.
Also, can the family live easily and well on one salary?
The reaction to this question is always interesting, in the UK.
If only one partner in a couple worked full time house prices would also be cheaper
In theory, yes. I'm certainly convinced by the theory that having both parents working has driven house prices up. I think the reverse would take a long time to filter though, though, in which time I'm not sure how all those single income families would afford to live.
Certainly government could subsidise stay at home mothers more, as Meloni's government in Italy is now doing
Well it could do. But how would it afford that? Presumably by taxing the childless more. Which doesn't really help with them being able to start families. But it would certainly start to reduce house prices such that the next, much smaller generation, might be able to manage on one income.
You could also reduce spending on childcare for working mothers and spend it on stay at home mothers instead
The revenue and choice neutral option would be to make the free childcare claimable by a stay at home parent rather than just a nursury provider.
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
I'd love to see the list of gift totals that all MPs received, not just Labour. What about the ministers last year?
Keir Starmer is the PM today. He has repaid £6000 so he;s been get an average of £500 a week in gifts Thats 20 pensioner homes that could be heated.
So you are proposing that companies should bribe the PM by paying for x lots of winter fuel allowance?
Because otherwise I've not a clue what your argument is..
Yes, it's a better economic policy than the one he has today
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
You certainly weren't aware that politicians of all parties accept and declare gifts and have done for decades. Only that ignorance could explain your daily performative pearl-clutching on here.
My father was a toolmaker so I expected much more from KEIR STARMER not that he TOOK OVER £100000. It seems his push for clean government is nonsense and KEIR STARMER IS A MASSIVE HYPOCRITE
Yes, it's the hypocrisy of it especially after complaining about Johnson's wallpaper begging.
It is not wrong to say he is a hypocrite here. There was even a picture of him holding a roll of wallpaper looking wistfully at it.
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
If Sir Keir gave the Falklands to Argentina white working class and lower middle class voters who voted for him in July would rush to the Tories and Reform so fast he wouldn't know what had hit him. Labour would lose every single redwall seat it won back in July and more. Not to mention the Sun and Mail would pour the biggest pile of shit over his head too.
Indeed the Argentine President Milei is not even focused on the Falklands now but growing the Argentine economy.
I disagree with the Chagos Islands decision on the risk it could become a Chinese military base but the population there has far less desire to stay a British overseas territory than the Falklands does
The majority of the white working class etc voters weren't around, or were only just around, when the Falklands war took place, 40 years ago.
They are patriots though as are the lower middle classes, they hate weak leaders who don't stand up for Britain and its overseas territories, hence they voted for Thatcher, Blair and Boris but not for Corbyn and would throw out Starmer as a weak, defeatist wokeist if he even considered handing over the Falklands.
The Sun too would instantly switch back to the Tories while piling a massive bucket of shite all over Starmer's head on its frontpages
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
You certainly weren't aware that politicians of all parties accept and declare gifts and have done for decades. Only that ignorance could explain your daily performative pearl-clutching on here.
I am just about old enough to remember £200k of gold wallpaper, it is a shame these young whippersnappers have no recall of such events.
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
You certainly weren't aware that politicians of all parties accept and declare gifts and have done for decades. Only that ignorance could explain your daily performative pearl-clutching on here.
My father was a toolmaker so I expected much more from KEIR STARMER not that he TOOK OVER £100000. It seems his push for clean government is nonsense and KEIR STARMER IS A MASSIVE HYPOCRITE
Yes, it's the hypocrisy of it especially after complaining about Johnson's wallpaper begging.
It is not wrong to say he is a hypocrite here. There was even a picture of him holding a roll of wallpaper looking wistfully at it.
what a mug.
Of course wallpaper was a permanent (tacky) investment in a state asset. As opposed to 1 off consumable freebies for personal enjoyment.
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
If Sir Keir gave the Falklands to Argentina white working class and lower middle class voters who voted for him in July would rush to the Tories and Reform so fast he wouldn't know what had hit him. Labour would lose every single redwall seat it won back in July and more. Not to mention the Sun and Mail would pour the biggest pile of shit over his head too.
Indeed the Argentine President Milei is not even focused on the Falklands now but growing the Argentine economy.
I disagree with the Chagos Islands decision on the risk it could become a Chinese military base but the population there has far less desire to stay a British overseas territory than the Falklands does
Milei’s VP is making a lot of noise at the moment re the new Falklands agreement on flights and visits to graves. She’s from the strong Nationalist and Military background so it’s not impossible it flares at some point.
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
I'd love to see the list of gift totals that all MPs received, not just Labour. What about the ministers last year?
Keir Starmer is the PM today. He has repaid £6000 so he;s been get an average of £500 a week in gifts Thats 20 pensioner homes that could be heated.
So you are proposing that companies should bribe the PM by paying for x lots of winter fuel allowance?
Because otherwise I've not a clue what your argument is..
He has no argument. He just shouts a lot, and writes unintelligible posts that rarely trouble the punctuators.
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
If Sir Keir gave the Falklands to Argentina white working class and lower middle class voters who voted for him in July would rush to the Tories and Reform so fast he wouldn't know what had hit him. Labour would lose every single redwall seat it won back in July and more. Not to mention the Sun and Mail would pour the biggest pile of shit over his head too.
Indeed the Argentine President Milei is not even focused on the Falklands now but growing the Argentine economy.
I disagree with the Chagos Islands decision on the risk it could become a Chinese military base but the population there has far less desire to stay a British overseas territory than the Falklands does
The majority of the white working class etc voters weren't around, or were only just around, when the Falklands war took place, 40 years ago.
They are patriots though as are the lower middle classes, they hate weak leaders who don't stand up for Britain and its overseas territories, hence they voted for Thatcher and Boris but not for Corbyn and would throw out Starmer as a weak, defeatist wokeist if he even considered handing over the Falklands.
The Sun too would instantly switch back to the Tories
Anyhoo much as it's fun to point out SKS unsuitability for PM shouldnt we be getting back to the main point of why is Rachel Reeves so crap ?
Why is everyone making out they have loads of friends?
I only have four proper ones - two male and two female. They have 3 kids between them. So with my one that's 4 between 5.
Why is the birth-rate falling? Numerous reasons, obviously, but I'd highlight female emancipation. Women know it's a bum deal for them and with more empowerment are freer to turn it down.
I have lots of good friends. I count good friends as “people I can discuss anything with”. Sorry if that upends your view of the world
Ah ok. That includes me then, I suppose (although I didn't spot my initial on the list). One child - hardly shifting the dial, I know.
Certainly doesn’t include you
Oh. No soft-soaping there. Fair enough.
Well good luck with the next trip. It will hopefully take your mind off Keir Starmer for a short while anyway.
Why do I envisage that it won't? I expect he'll be in somewhere gorgeous, like the French Caribbean, being served wonderful rum cocktails by a beautiful hostess, yet thumbing his laptop furiously to tell PB about the latest thing Sir Keir has done deliberately to irritate him.
I could be wrong, though.
Or you could be right. TBH I'm not paying massive attention to Brit affairs atm because I have a head full of Nov 5th. But the thing is, PBers like Leon and AlanBrooke, these are full-fat units of the Right, so to see an avalanche of derision/criticism from them about a Labour government, any Labour government, just makes me go, "phew, thank god". I mean, imagine if they were happy and supportive. That would be a real worry.
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
I'd love to see the list of gift totals that all MPs received, not just Labour. What about the ministers last year?
I think the issue at play is Starmer came into office as someone who would stop sleaze and cronyism, and unfortunately he has tarred himself with the same brush and the principal charge he faces is he is a hypocrite
There can be no dispute that Reeves first act to withdraw the WFP from 10 million pensioners and hand it to train drivers has cut through, and now with Lord Alli seemingly gifting the cabinet with freebies Starmer has seen his personal rating dive and ironically Sunaks government is more popular than Starmer
If you had predicted this present stare of affairs on the 5th July most everyone would be astonished, and most sensible Labour supporters must be concerned at the present state of the party notwithstanding the few who seem to be in denial and keep maintaining nothing to see here
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
Melania Trump about to unleash a bombshell memoir to be published on Tuesday that could depress evangelical and pro life Catholic turnout for Trump in November
Why is everyone making out they have loads of friends?
I only have four proper ones - two male and two female. They have 3 kids between them. So with my one that's 4 between 5.
Why is the birth-rate falling? Numerous reasons, obviously, but I'd highlight female emancipation. Women know it's a bum deal for them and with more empowerment are freer to turn it down.
Declining birth-rate just seems to be an inevitable consequence of socio-economic change. Difficult to mitigate although some Govts are trying.
That said, I do wonder about student debt putting people off committing to another major long-term financial commitment (to say the least). And, of course, everyone's social media account these days seems to be full of folk having fun in exotic locations. Can't do that very easily with small kids in tow. Lifestyle choice. But easy to understand the regrets when 40+ and the attractiveness of the funky lifestyle starts fading somewhat...
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
If Sir Keir gave the Falklands to Argentina white working class and lower middle class voters who voted for him in July would rush to the Tories and Reform so fast he wouldn't know what had hit him. Labour would lose every single redwall seat it won back in July and more. Not to mention the Sun and Mail would pour the biggest pile of shit over his head too.
Indeed the Argentine President Milei is not even focused on the Falklands now but growing the Argentine economy.
I disagree with the Chagos Islands decision on the risk it could become a Chinese military base but the population there has far less desire to stay a British overseas territory than the Falklands does
I appreciate the Falklands still has a resonance with certain elderly Tories, but does anyone else under the age of fifty really give a fig? I'm being serious. I encounter people these days who don't know who the Beatles are. Would a rock with a lot of penguins really get them manning the barricades?
It seems clear Starmer has accepted 100k or so. I don't think that he's done so blindly. Surely he must have thought - well, if I'm to be PM, I've got to be scrubbed white clean. So what did he accept when he was just LOTO? What did he accept when he was DPP?
Trump getting locked up may have nothing on this!
(Who knows, but stumbling blindly into 100k of gifts seems unlikely)
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
If Sir Keir gave the Falklands to Argentina white working class and lower middle class voters who voted for him in July would rush to the Tories and Reform so fast he wouldn't know what had hit him. Labour would lose every single redwall seat it won back in July and more. Not to mention the Sun and Mail would pour the biggest pile of shit over his head too.
Indeed the Argentine President Milei is not even focused on the Falklands now but growing the Argentine economy.
I disagree with the Chagos Islands decision on the risk it could become a Chinese military base but the population there has far less desire to stay a British overseas territory than the Falklands does
I appreciate the Falklands still has a resonance with certain elderly Tories, but does anyone else under the age of fifty really give a fig? I'm being serious. I encounter people these days who don't know who the Beatles are. Would a rock with a lot of penguins really get them manning the barricades?
It's British and the people there want it to stay that way. If they change their mind and decide they want to be Chinese then that's fine.
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
Excellent, I am sure Pakistan and India will enjoy that argument.
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
I wonder how many other interesting territorial claims could be made on such a basis. And, what's to stop the Chagos Islanders just declaring UDI?
Seems endemic in the culture of the Party. They need to get a handle on it ASAP. SKS has just prolonged it with his actions yesterday re-the Taylor Swift tickets.
Blair survived cash for fags. This is survivable but they need to draw a line under it.
Blair went on TV and fessed up. Job done.
Yeah, but he was a pretty straight kind of guy, on his own account.
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
I'd love to see the list of gift totals that all MPs received, not just Labour. What about the ministers last year?
I think the issue at play is Starmer came into office as someone who would stop sleaze and cronyism, and unfortunately he has tarred himself with the same brush and the principal charge he faces is he is a hypocrite
There can be no dispute that Reeves first act to withdraw the WFP from 10 million pensioners and hand it to train drivers has cut through, and now with Lord Alli seemingly gifting the cabinet with freebies Starmer has seen his personal rating dive and ironically Sunaks government is more popular than Starmer
If you had predicted this present stare of affairs on the 5th July most everyone would be astonished, and most sensible Labour supporters must be concerned at the present state of the party notwithstanding the few who seem to be in denial and keep maintaining nothing to see here
I don't think many labour supporters are happy about this. It does seem like a bit of a pile on though. Not sure where you think the wfp money pays the train drivers though, does the government pay their wages? I am not a labour supporter or member but I confirm that I voted for them to help kick out a Tory and I have no buyer's remorse for that. The media pile on has been quite shocking, bearing in mind we haven't had a budget yet. I shouldn't be surprised with pb tories attitude. They've had 4 years of Boris grift to grin and bear, so they must be so thankful. As a libdem I don't really worry too much by labour because I think their hearts are in the right place. The tories were vile and needed removing.
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
If Sir Keir gave the Falklands to Argentina white working class and lower middle class voters who voted for him in July would rush to the Tories and Reform so fast he wouldn't know what had hit him. Labour would lose every single redwall seat it won back in July and more. Not to mention the Sun and Mail would pour the biggest pile of shit over his head too.
Indeed the Argentine President Milei is not even focused on the Falklands now but growing the Argentine economy.
I disagree with the Chagos Islands decision on the risk it could become a Chinese military base but the population there has far less desire to stay a British overseas territory than the Falklands does
I appreciate the Falklands still has a resonance with certain elderly Tories, but does anyone else under the age of fifty really give a fig? I'm being serious. I encounter people these days who don't know who the Beatles are. Would a rock with a lot of penguins really get them manning the barricades?
The white working class and lower middle class certainly would, even if lefty students wouldn't.
It would be seen as a sign of utter weakness from a Labour PM and the redwall would switch en masse back to the Tories and Reform.
Not to mention the Falkland Islanders themselves would likely not accept being handed over to Argentina on a plate without a fight and would probably also go to war to defend themselves
Melania Trump about to unleash a bombshell memoir to be published on Tuesday that could depress evangelical and pro life Catholic turnout for Trump in November
Seems odd they'd let her if that's the likely effect?
I don't think it will depress his vote, and indeed I suspect it's tactical.
Trump and other Republicans need to face both ways on this issue - the pro-life vote is important, but is very much a minority position. Polls in the US consistently show a healthy pro-choice majority (60%+). That's markedly different between parties, but you're still looking at 40% support among Republicans - they are much more divided than Democrats on this (where about 85% are pro-choice) and pro-choice Republican is very definitely a constituency Trump needs to hold onto.
His position has to be that this is a state rights issue, not a reproductive rights one. In front of Christian right audiences, he's often tempted to go further than that, causing him some issues for him. But it isn't unhelpful to him at all if Melania nods to the pro-choice side of the debate.
This was pretty uncomfortable for Trump in the debate with Harris. She scored some points pinning him more closely to the pro-life position than he'd like. It's a good issue for Democrats as it is a more divisive issue for Republicans than Democrats - they stand to gain a lot more reaching out to pro-choice Republicans than they stand to lose from pro-life Democrats.
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
So if Cameron stopped the negotiations, they must have been ongoing when Cleverly was Foreign Sec - interesting.
Why is everyone making out they have loads of friends?
I only have four proper ones - two male and two female. They have 3 kids between them. So with my one that's 4 between 5.
Why is the birth-rate falling? Numerous reasons, obviously, but I'd highlight female emancipation. Women know it's a bum deal for them and with more empowerment are freer to turn it down.
I have lots of good friends. I count good friends as “people I can discuss anything with”. Sorry if that upends your view of the world
Ah ok. That includes me then, I suppose (although I didn't spot my initial on the list). One child - hardly shifting the dial, I know.
Certainly doesn’t include you
Oh. No soft-soaping there. Fair enough.
Well good luck with the next trip. It will hopefully take your mind off Keir Starmer for a short while anyway.
That wasn’t meant meanly or personally, I just don’t count people I’ve met only online as “friends”
Indeed I’ve long thought there should be a new word for people like us. Internet personae you get to know well but never that well, and never for real
“Acquaintances” is too cold, and also doesn’t capture the internet aspect. “Friends” is too warm and intimate
A good friend is someone you can discuss anything with: sex, politics, health, love
A mere friend is someone whose company is enjoyable and you regularly - weekly or yearly - seek it out (and vice versa) but topics might be restricted
An acquaintance is “someone you have met more than once” but you’ve never had more than one head-to-head for the sake of it
What are we on here? “Locals” perhaps. In the pb pub. Regulars
Well we were discussing quite intimate things to do with clothing yesterday. I won't repeat the word since I physically can't. But ok, I see the distinction. "Locals" works yes. Split into "Regulars" and "Occasionals". We'd both be in the 1st category for our sins.
Online can verge into IRL though. I recall when you had your Covid jab on the day after me in the very same room, probably sitting on the very same chair. That was quite something.
“A big win for Mauritius: not only will the UK pay Port Louis for ‘taking back’ an archipelago it’d never held sovereignty* over, but they’ll now be able to extract lots of juicy Chinese aid in exchange for complicating** US/UK use of Diego Garcia… “
"Then Brexit left many European nations reluctant to continue backing the UK’s stance in international forums."
Whoops
Well the Tories were still able to not hand it over even after Brexit which Starmer opposed anyway. Though he says the deal keeps the US and UK base we will see how long that lasts
"Then Brexit left many European nations reluctant to continue backing the UK’s stance in international forums."
Whoops
Kind of missing the point that we didn't have a voice or a stance in a lot of international forums whilst we were in the EU because we ceded that right to the EU.
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
You certainly weren't aware that politicians of all parties accept and declare gifts and have done for decades. Only that ignorance could explain your daily performative pearl-clutching on here.
My father was a toolmaker so I expected much more from KEIR STARMER not that he TOOK OVER £100000. It seems his push for clean government is nonsense and KEIR STARMER IS A MASSIVE HYPOCRITE
Yes, it's the hypocrisy of it especially after complaining about Johnson's wallpaper begging.
It is not wrong to say he is a hypocrite here. There was even a picture of him holding a roll of wallpaper looking wistfully at it.
what a mug.
Of course wallpaper was a permanent (tacky) investment in a state asset. As opposed to 1 off consumable freebies for personal enjoyment.
Anabob's mate, TRUSS, painted over it too.
From Jezza Hunt.
‘We are moving in, as it happens this weekend. I had one or two other things on until then. We did go in though, just to have a look around the flat first and, of course, where did we want to go first? We wanted to go and see the wallpaper. The massive disappointment was to discover that that wallpaper – this may be a world exclusive – had started to peel off of its own accord and had actually been painted over by Liz Truss. So I will be saying to my children: scratch over there, there’s gold in them walls.’
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
So if Cameron stopped the negotiations, they must have been ongoing when Cleverly was Foreign Sec - interesting.
Depends what shape the negotiations were taking. Perhaps no progress was being made as sovereignty was not up for discussion.
Melania Trump about to unleash a bombshell memoir to be published on Tuesday that could depress evangelical and pro life Catholic turnout for Trump in November
Seems odd they'd let her if that's the likely effect?
I don't think it will depress his vote, and indeed I suspect it's tactical.
Trump and other Republicans need to face both ways on this issue - the pro-life vote is important, but is very much a minority position. Polls in the US consistently show a healthy pro-choice majority (60%+). That's markedly different between parties, but you're still looking at 40% support among Republicans - they are much more divided than Democrats on this (where about 85% are pro-choice) and pro-choice Republican is very definitely a constituency Trump needs to hold onto.
His position has to be that this is a state rights issue, not a reproductive rights one. In front of Christian right audiences, he's often tempted to go further than that, causing him some issues for him. But it isn't unhelpful to him at all if Melania nods to the pro-choice side of the debate.
The pro choice side of the debate and women for whom that is a top issue are overwhelmingly voting Harris anyway.
Pro life evangelical turnout though is vital for Trump in many Midwestern and Southern swing states, if they stay home that could see Georgia and North Carolina (both in the top 10 states by evangelicals) in play for Harris and Walz. Evangelicals are already annoyed Trump isn't pushing for a Federal abortion ban after the SC repealed Roe v Wade, if his wife now pushes pro choice that will hurt him.
Last time a GOP nominee's wife was so vocally pro choice was Betty Ford in 1976 and Carter won with evangelicals not turning out for Ford
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
I wonder how many other interesting territorial claims could be made on such a basis. And, what's to stop the Chagos Islanders just declaring UDI?
Are there any Chagos islanders now ? - The only population (I think !) is entirely US/UK military for Diego Garcia airbase, which effectively remains the property of ours (OK the USA in reality ).
"Then Brexit left many European nations reluctant to continue backing the UK’s stance in international forums."
Whoops
Kind of missing the point that we didn't have a voice or a stance in a lot of international forums whilst we were in the EU because we ceded that right to the EU.
It’s also ridiculous. We could have just told the Mauritians (and Chinese) to stuff it. The Chagossians are a different matter - and should have been treated as such
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
I wonder how many other interesting territorial claims could be made on such a basis. And, what's to stop the Chagos Islanders just declaring UDI?
Are there any Chagos islanders now ? - The only population (I think !) is entirely US/UK military for Diego Garcia airbase, which effectively remains the property of ours (OK the USA in reality ).
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
I wonder how many other interesting territorial claims could be made on such a basis. And, what's to stop the Chagos Islanders just declaring UDI?
Are there any Chagos islanders now ? - The only population (I think !) is entirely US/UK military for Diego Garcia airbase, which effectively remains the property of ours (OK the USA in reality ).
There are no islanders now other than the military and usa contractors.
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
I wonder how many other interesting territorial claims could be made on such a basis. And, what's to stop the Chagos Islanders just declaring UDI?
Are there any Chagos islanders now ? - The only population (I think !) is entirely US/UK military for Diego Garcia airbase, which effectively remains the property of ours (OK the USA in reality ).
There are no islanders now other than the military and usa contractors.
“A big win for Mauritius: not only will the UK pay Port Louis for ‘taking back’ an archipelago it’d never held sovereignty* over, but they’ll now be able to extract lots of juicy Chinese aid in exchange for complicating** US/UK use of Diego Garcia… “
"Then Brexit left many European nations reluctant to continue backing the UK’s stance in international forums."
Whoops
Kind of missing the point that we didn't have a voice or a stance in a lot of international forums whilst we were in the EU because we ceded that right to the EU.
A good point too. And then we send David Lammy! (I actually quite like Lammy these days, although didn't used to.)
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
I wonder how many other interesting territorial claims could be made on such a basis. And, what's to stop the Chagos Islanders just declaring UDI?
Are there any Chagos islanders now ? - The only population (I think !) is entirely US/UK military for Diego Garcia airbase, which effectively remains the property of ours (OK the USA in reality ).
There are no islanders now other than the military and usa contractors.
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
If Sir Keir gave the Falklands to Argentina white working class and lower middle class voters who voted for him in July would rush to the Tories and Reform so fast he wouldn't know what had hit him. Labour would lose every single redwall seat it won back in July and more. Not to mention the Sun and Mail would pour the biggest pile of shit over his head too.
Indeed the Argentine President Milei is not even focused on the Falklands now but growing the Argentine economy.
I disagree with the Chagos Islands decision on the risk it could become a Chinese military base but the population there has far less desire to stay a British overseas territory than the Falklands does
I appreciate the Falklands still has a resonance with certain elderly Tories, but does anyone else under the age of fifty really give a fig? I'm being serious. I encounter people these days who don't know who the Beatles are. Would a rock with a lot of penguins really get them manning the barricades?
Simple belief in democracy. The Chagos Islanders did not want to be part of the UK so we are right to withdraw. The Falkland Islanders very much want to remain part of the UK so we should continue to support them. If and when they change their minds then we should give them independence.
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
I wonder how many other interesting territorial claims could be made on such a basis. And, what's to stop the Chagos Islanders just declaring UDI?
Are there any Chagos islanders now ? - The only population (I think !) is entirely US/UK military for Diego Garcia airbase, which effectively remains the property of ours (OK the USA in reality ).
There are no islanders now other than the military and usa contractors.
Regions with significant populations United Kingdom – 3,000 Mauritius Seychelles Smaller populations: France Switzerland
Since there's more Chagossians here than Mauritius - why on earth does Mauritius get the islands ?!
Should have been a right to return for descendants, or cash in lieu (Since they're uninhabited and there's no infrastructure other than Diego Garcia which for obvious reasons is going to be fenced & guarded). Giving the islands to Mauritius is just preposterous to my mind and not in ours or the Chagos Islanders best interests.
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
If Sir Keir gave the Falklands to Argentina white working class and lower middle class voters who voted for him in July would rush to the Tories and Reform so fast he wouldn't know what had hit him. Labour would lose every single redwall seat it won back in July and more. Not to mention the Sun and Mail would pour the biggest pile of shit over his head too.
Indeed the Argentine President Milei is not even focused on the Falklands now but growing the Argentine economy.
I disagree with the Chagos Islands decision on the risk it could become a Chinese military base but the population there has far less desire to stay a British overseas territory than the Falklands does
I appreciate the Falklands still has a resonance with certain elderly Tories, but does anyone else under the age of fifty really give a fig? I'm being serious. I encounter people these days who don't know who the Beatles are. Would a rock with a lot of penguins really get them manning the barricades?
Simple belief in democracy. The Chagos Islanders did not want to be part of the UK so we are right to withdraw. The Falkland Islanders very much want to remain part of the UK so we should continue to support them. If and when they change their minds then we should give them independence.
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
Hasn't the international court ruled in Mauritius favour on this one?
"Then Brexit left many European nations reluctant to continue backing the UK’s stance in international forums."
Whoops
Kind of missing the point that we didn't have a voice or a stance in a lot of international forums whilst we were in the EU because we ceded that right to the EU.
It’s also ridiculous. We could have just told the Mauritians (and Chinese) to stuff it. The Chagossians are a different matter - and should have been treated as such
I have not looked at the detaila yet. I just saw the headline and immediately popped over here to see what was being said. But in principle I think we should give the islands back to the Chagosians. If they have indicated they want to be part of the Mauritius Maritime Empire then I see no problems with this decision. If they were not consulted or had objected to this decision then I see lots of problems with it.
I assume we will get the fine detail over the next few days.
Interesting that this has apparently come out of the blue with no indications it was happening until it was done. I thought the FO leaked like a sieve. Or is that only when it serves their own ends?
"The backdrop to every single thing that the Labour party has done in government has been its first action to take them into fuel allowance away from 10 million pensioners. That has set the tone for everything, and it’s the backdrop for for how actions are seen.
People see that you’ve taken this from 10 million people, and taking that for free from businesses.
That’s the truth. There’s anger out there, and behaviour has to change."
Guardian live blog
People angry for the removal of freebie shocker.
I was SHOCKED to find KEIR STARMER TOOK OVER £100000 of gifts.
Is PB aware of this ?
I'd love to see the list of gift totals that all MPs received, not just Labour. What about the ministers last year?
I think the issue at play is Starmer came into office as someone who would stop sleaze and cronyism, and unfortunately he has tarred himself with the same brush and the principal charge he faces is he is a hypocrite
There can be no dispute that Reeves first act to withdraw the WFP from 10 million pensioners and hand it to train drivers has cut through, and now with Lord Alli seemingly gifting the cabinet with freebies Starmer has seen his personal rating dive and ironically Sunaks government is more popular than Starmer
If you had predicted this present stare of affairs on the 5th July most everyone would be astonished, and most sensible Labour supporters must be concerned at the present state of the party notwithstanding the few who seem to be in denial and keep maintaining nothing to see here
I don't think many labour supporters are happy about this. It does seem like a bit of a pile on though. Not sure where you think the wfp money pays the train drivers though, does the government pay their wages? I am not a labour supporter or member but I confirm that I voted for them to help kick out a Tory and I have no buyer's remorse for that. The media pile on has been quite shocking, bearing in mind we haven't had a budget yet. I shouldn't be surprised with pb tories attitude. They've had 4 years of Boris grift to grin and bear, so they must be so thankful. As a libdem I don't really worry too much by labour because I think their hearts are in the right place. The tories were vile and needed removing.
The problem Reeves created was to means test the WFP thereby removing it from 10 million pensioners and at the same time announce the settlement of the train drivers dispute with a huge payrise. The optics were awful though universal WFP had to be curtailed but had she done it in her Autumn statement with an implemention for 2025 it would not have been anywhere near as controversial
It has been challenged in Scotland and may yet have to be paid for this year, but the irony is that the drive to get pensioners signed up to pensioner's credit will evaporate the savings anyway
I resigned my membership of the conservative party at the time of the Johnson debacle and frankly am relieved they lost and have 5 years to try to become a one nation party, and if Cleverly becomes leader I will rejoin, but not with anyone else
As far as the pile on labour is concerned I mainly watch Sky news and the change in attitude from anti conservative to anti Labour is notable but maybe as journalists they are seeking gotchas and a successful gotcha of a PM or cabinet minister must be high in their playbook
Starmer hands Diego Garcia “back to” Mauritius (they never owned it)
But of course he does. Next the Elgin Marbles, the Benin Bronzes, he will probably try and hand over Stonehenge to Norway
Absolutely insane
Here is the official statement on Diego Garcia: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/joint-statement-between-uk-and-mauritius-3-october-2024 (You will notice the word "back" is not used anywhere.) It looks like a deal has been reached between different parties that will help solve the longstanding problem of people having been expelled from their homes. Is that not good news?
A 99-year lease for Diego Garcia. By which point the Chinese population may be less than half its current number.
Rumours of the demise of the base have been greatly exaggerated, and Britain has again asserted its respect for the international rule of law.
And yet again the PB Tory hot takes have proven... embarrassing.
A diplomatic and humane act by Sir Keir, that may go some way to assuaging a historical wrong.
Are you missing the part where the negotiations have been going for years? But no, it's a Starmer masterstroke!
It wouldn't surprise me if the agreement was essentially done before the election, but that Sunak & co stalled on it because they didn't want to be the people to announce it and upset the right-wing press.
Another reason for Sunak calling the election in mid-summer. Along with the prison releases.
Lord Cameron had told the FCDO to stop the negotiations while he was Foreign Sec. They recommenced under Lammy.
This is quite the image
It was administered as part of Mauritius during colonial times.
Hasn't the international court ruled in Mauritius favour on this one?
The international court only matters when it rules on matters in our favour.
Why is everyone making out they have loads of friends?
I only have four proper ones - two male and two female. They have 3 kids between them. So with my one that's 4 between 5.
Why is the birth-rate falling? Numerous reasons, obviously, but I'd highlight female emancipation. Women know it's a bum deal for them and with more empowerment are freer to turn it down.
I have lots of good friends. I count good friends as “people I can discuss anything with”. Sorry if that upends your view of the world
Ah ok. That includes me then, I suppose (although I didn't spot my initial on the list). One child - hardly shifting the dial, I know.
Certainly doesn’t include you
Oh. No soft-soaping there. Fair enough.
Well good luck with the next trip. It will hopefully take your mind off Keir Starmer for a short while anyway.
That wasn’t meant meanly or personally, I just don’t count people I’ve met only online as “friends”
Indeed I’ve long thought there should be a new word for people like us. Internet personae you get to know well but never that well, and never for real
“Acquaintances” is too cold, and also doesn’t capture the internet aspect. “Friends” is too warm and intimate
A good friend is someone you can discuss anything with: sex, politics, health, love
A mere friend is someone whose company is enjoyable and you regularly - weekly or yearly - seek it out (and vice versa) but topics might be restricted
An acquaintance is “someone you have met more than once” but you’ve never had more than one head-to-head for the sake of it
What are we on here? “Locals” perhaps. In the pb pub. Regulars
Back to @kinabalu 's comment that "but I'd highlight female emancipation. Women know it's a bum deal for them and with more empowerment are freer to turn it down"
- yes, but - I'm not sure in the developed world that's true.
Parenthood isn't really that bad a deal for women. I wouldn't volunteer for pregnancy and childbirth, but that is only a comparatively small part of parenthood - by far the bigger implication is the amount of resources you must pour into it, and that's true of both parents. Had I not had children, I reckon I could have been retiring in a year or two, rather than in 12-15 years. It's on the surface a bum deal for all parents. And yet the species has persisted, because actually, having children is brilliant for all sorts of reasons it's very hard to explain even to yourself, let alone anyone who doesn't have children. And the number of women who reach the end of childrearing age by choice is demographically negligible. They are there, but they always have been. Far more common are the women who reach the end of childrearing age childless who wish it were not so. Almost no-one regrets the children they had. But plenty regret the children they did not.
For the purposes of clarity, I'm not arguing that female emancipation is a bad thing. I'm arguing that I'm not satisfied with it as an argument for the decline in birth rate. Or at least, I'm not arguing that I'm satisfied with it as an argument for the rise in childlessness.
Melania Trump about to unleash a bombshell memoir to be published on Tuesday that could depress evangelical and pro life Catholic turnout for Trump in November
Seems odd they'd let her if that's the likely effect?
"Let her"?
Absent a provision in her pre-nup (which I don't rule out), not sure these Republican "Friends of Gilead" quite have the sway over their chattels they used to.
After his Chagos triumph, Sir Keir will surely have his sights next on the Falklands. It would be hugely demoralizing for the Tories, destroying the last unquestionable success of the Thatcher legacy. Would Sir Keir be above such gamesmanship?
If Sir Keir gave the Falklands to Argentina white working class and lower middle class voters who voted for him in July would rush to the Tories and Reform so fast he wouldn't know what had hit him. Labour would lose every single redwall seat it won back in July and more. Not to mention the Sun and Mail would pour the biggest pile of shit over his head too.
Indeed the Argentine President Milei is not even focused on the Falklands now but growing the Argentine economy.
I disagree with the Chagos Islands decision on the risk it could become a Chinese military base but the population there has far less desire to stay a British overseas territory than the Falklands does
I appreciate the Falklands still has a resonance with certain elderly Tories, but does anyone else under the age of fifty really give a fig? I'm being serious. I encounter people these days who don't know who the Beatles are. Would a rock with a lot of penguins really get them manning the barricades?
Simple belief in democracy. The Chagos Islanders did not want to be part of the UK so we are right to withdraw. The Falkland Islanders very much want to remain part of the UK so we should continue to support them. If and when they change their minds then we should give them independence.
Like Northern Ireland
Absolutely. That has always been my position. Indeed I would like them to make that decision sooner rather tha later but they seem to be in no rush to do so.
So to be clear Diego Garcia is 1339 miles from Mauritius. We took control of it in 1965. Prior to that there was no relationship between Mauritius and the Chagos islands of which Diego Garcia forms the most substantial part. We took control from Mauritius which was then under our control as well but which has since become independent. We, somewhat shamefully, removed the indigenous population from Diego Garcia to Mauritius, approximately 50 years ago. We then built a large base on the island that was also used by the Americans. And now we are giving this to Mauritius.
This is slightly mad. If the indigenous population still wanted to return we perhaps had a moral responsibility to do that. If they wanted independence from us we should then respect that too. If they wanted to combine with Mauritius that would be up to them. But on what conceivable basis are we giving a country something it never had and to which it has no obvious claim?
Melania Trump about to unleash a bombshell memoir to be published on Tuesday that could depress evangelical and pro life Catholic turnout for Trump in November
Seems odd they'd let her if that's the likely effect?
"Let her"?
Absent a provision in her pre-nup (which I don't rule out), not sure these Republican "Friends of Gilead" quite have the sway over their chattels they used to.
Yes but you know what I mean. She's on board isn't she. Semi detached but on board.
So to be clear Diego Garcia is 1339 miles from Mauritius. We took control of it in 1965. Prior to that there was no relationship between Mauritius and the Chagos islands of which Diego Garcia forms the most substantial part. We took control from Mauritius which was then under our control as well but which has since become independent. We, somewhat shamefully, removed the indigenous population from Diego Garcia to Mauritius, approximately 50 years ago. We then built a large base on the island that was also used by the Americans. And now we are giving this to Mauritius.
This is slightly mad. If the indigenous population still wanted to return we perhaps had a moral responsibility to do that. If they wanted independence from us we should then respect that too. If they wanted to combine with Mauritius that would be up to them. But on what conceivable basis are we giving a country something it never had and to which it has no obvious claim?
Because we are governed by literal imbeciles (and this applies to both sides - the Tories under Truss (!!) began this insane negotiation)
Starmer the human rights lawyer finishes because it makes him feel good
Why is everyone making out they have loads of friends?
I only have four proper ones - two male and two female. They have 3 kids between them. So with my one that's 4 between 5.
Why is the birth-rate falling? Numerous reasons, obviously, but I'd highlight female emancipation. Women know it's a bum deal for them and with more empowerment are freer to turn it down.
Falling birthrate in UK; a whole basket of overlapping reasons:
Female careers - both choice and necessity leading to finite female caring/nurturing time Education structure - female best years spent in education and career development House prices and size Lack of social housing Uncertainty of renting sector Marriage breakdown Contraception and abortion Discontent among women with men Cost and difficulty of childcare Cars and car seats - this imposes a convenience maximum of 2 The modern custom that children have their own individual room.
Melania Trump about to unleash a bombshell memoir to be published on Tuesday that could depress evangelical and pro life Catholic turnout for Trump in November
Seems odd they'd let her if that's the likely effect?
I don't think it will depress his vote, and indeed I suspect it's tactical.
Trump and other Republicans need to face both ways on this issue - the pro-life vote is important, but is very much a minority position. Polls in the US consistently show a healthy pro-choice majority (60%+). That's markedly different between parties, but you're still looking at 40% support among Republicans - they are much more divided than Democrats on this (where about 85% are pro-choice) and pro-choice Republican is very definitely a constituency Trump needs to hold onto.
His position has to be that this is a state rights issue, not a reproductive rights one. In front of Christian right audiences, he's often tempted to go further than that, causing him some issues for him. But it isn't unhelpful to him at all if Melania nods to the pro-choice side of the debate.
The pro choice side of the debate and women for whom that is a top issue are overwhelmingly voting Harris anyway.
Pro life evangelical turnout though is vital for Trump in many Midwestern and Southern swing states, if they stay home that could see Georgia and North Carolina (both in the top 10 states by evangelicals) in play for Harris and Walz. Evangelicals are already annoyed Trump isn't pushing for a Federal abortion ban after the SC repealed Roe v Wade, if his wife now pushes pro choice that will hurt him.
Last time a GOP nominee's wife was so vocally pro choice was Betty Ford in 1976 and Carter won with evangelicals not turning out for Ford
I really don't think Betty Ford's views on abortion were the key reason Carter did better than most Democrats amongst evangelicals. Carter was (and indeed is) a southern Baptist - he was very keen to talk about it, and was pretty popular in the south (where a lot of evangelicals live) for reasons not necessarily related to religion.
Ford was a born-again Christian too, funnily enough, but was uncomfortable talking about it, and was a mid-westerner.
With the island becoming a leasehold, presumably the plan is to slowly force the Americans out via a series of ever-increasing service charges, a dodgy management company, inflated insurance costs, endless regulations and section 20 notices, until staying becomes so costly they finally give up and move somewhere else.
So to be clear Diego Garcia is 1339 miles from Mauritius. We took control of it in 1965. Prior to that there was no relationship between Mauritius and the Chagos islands of which Diego Garcia forms the most substantial part. We took control from Mauritius which was then under our control as well but which has since become independent. We, somewhat shamefully, removed the indigenous population from Diego Garcia to Mauritius, approximately 50 years ago. We then built a large base on the island that was also used by the Americans. And now we are giving this to Mauritius.
This is slightly mad. If the indigenous population still wanted to return we perhaps had a moral responsibility to do that. If they wanted independence from us we should then respect that too. If they wanted to combine with Mauritius that would be up to them. But on what conceivable basis are we giving a country something it never had and to which it has no obvious claim?
Because we are governed by literal imbeciles (and this applies to both sides - the Tories under Truss (!!) began this insane negotiation)
Starmer the human rights lawyer finishes because it makes him feel good
The decision gets worse by the minute. Supposedly we handed these islands over to a country 1,300 miles away “for the Chagossians”
From the guardian:
“Chagossian Voices, a community organisation for Chagossians based in the UK and in several other countries, condemned the UK government’s lack of consultation with them before Thursday’s announcement.
It said: “Chagossian Voices deplore the exclusion of the Chagossian community from the negotiations which have produced this statement of intent concerning the sovereignty of our homeland. Chagossians have learned this outcome from the media and remain powerless and voiceless in determining our own future and the future of our homeland. The views of Chagossians, the Indigenous inhabitants of the islands, have been consistently and deliberately ignored and we demand full inclusion in the drafting of the treaty.”
So to be clear Diego Garcia is 1339 miles from Mauritius. We took control of it in 1965. Prior to that there was no relationship between Mauritius and the Chagos islands of which Diego Garcia forms the most substantial part. We took control from Mauritius which was then under our control as well but which has since become independent. We, somewhat shamefully, removed the indigenous population from Diego Garcia to Mauritius, approximately 50 years ago. We then built a large base on the island that was also used by the Americans. And now we are giving this to Mauritius.
This is slightly mad. If the indigenous population still wanted to return we perhaps had a moral responsibility to do that. If they wanted independence from us we should then respect that too. If they wanted to combine with Mauritius that would be up to them. But on what conceivable basis are we giving a country something it never had and to which it has no obvious claim?
Because we are governed by literal imbeciles (and this applies to both sides - the Tories under Truss (!!) began this insane negotiation)
Starmer the human rights lawyer finishes because it makes him feel good
"Oh, we can't give India and Pakistan independence, because it'll make us look like pussies!"
Well given the argument that territories administered as one unit in the colonial period must stay as one unit, then they would be one country and not India and Pakistan...
So to be clear Diego Garcia is 1339 miles from Mauritius. We took control of it in 1965. Prior to that there was no relationship between Mauritius and the Chagos islands of which Diego Garcia forms the most substantial part. We took control from Mauritius which was then under our control as well but which has since become independent. We, somewhat shamefully, removed the indigenous population from Diego Garcia to Mauritius, approximately 50 years ago. We then built a large base on the island that was also used by the Americans. And now we are giving this to Mauritius.
This is slightly mad. If the indigenous population still wanted to return we perhaps had a moral responsibility to do that. If they wanted independence from us we should then respect that too. If they wanted to combine with Mauritius that would be up to them. But on what conceivable basis are we giving a country something it never had and to which it has no obvious claim?
Because we are governed by literal imbeciles (and this applies to both sides - the Tories under Truss (!!) began this insane negotiation)
Starmer the human rights lawyer finishes because it makes him feel good
So to be clear Diego Garcia is 1339 miles from Mauritius. We took control of it in 1965. Prior to that there was no relationship between Mauritius and the Chagos islands of which Diego Garcia forms the most substantial part. We took control from Mauritius which was then under our control as well but which has since become independent. We, somewhat shamefully, removed the indigenous population from Diego Garcia to Mauritius, approximately 50 years ago. We then built a large base on the island that was also used by the Americans. And now we are giving this to Mauritius.
This is slightly mad. If the indigenous population still wanted to return we perhaps had a moral responsibility to do that. If they wanted independence from us we should then respect that too. If they wanted to combine with Mauritius that would be up to them. But on what conceivable basis are we giving a country something it never had and to which it has no obvious claim?
My main sadness about this is it will mean the end of British Indian Ocean Territory stamps.
Actually more seriously, my only real worry about this is what it will mean for the Marine Protection Area. It is currently the largest MPA in the world accounting for 50% of all No Take waters on the planet. The Mauritian Government have long objected to this and want to be able to fish there. This could be environmentally very bad.
Can we all just sit back and enjoy the fact that Britain is handing over sovereign territory to a distant foreign country which never owned that territory, and that we are actually PAYING that country to take our territory, and we are supposedly doing it on behalf of the indigenous people of that territory, who are however deeply angered by this decision and say they were not consulted
Comments
Ru - 3 (I think !)
Brother - 3
JS - 2
Al - 2
VK - 2
P - 2
AB - 1
To - 1
Ch - 1
Me - 1
JR - 1
DG - 0
Jo - 0
Ste - 0
Stu - 0
Ro - 0
Ia - 0
An - 0
Mi - 0
Going through mine 19 from 19. DG is probably due 1, To possibly another. Who knows with Ru lol. So the TFR is perhaps going to be roughly 1 or just marginally over.
Blair survived cash for fags. This is survivable but they need to draw a line under it.
Blair went on TV and fessed up. Job done.
Because otherwise I've not a clue what your argument is..
'Melania Trump passionately defends abortion rights in upcoming memoir'
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/02/melania-trump-memoir-defends-abortion-rights
It is not wrong to say he is a hypocrite here. There was even a picture of him holding a roll of wallpaper looking wistfully at it.
what a mug.
The Sun too would instantly switch back to the Tories while piling a massive bucket of shite all over Starmer's head on its frontpages
Nurse!
There can be no dispute that Reeves first act to withdraw the WFP from 10 million pensioners and hand it to train drivers has cut through, and now with Lord Alli seemingly gifting the cabinet with freebies Starmer has seen his personal rating dive and ironically Sunaks government is more popular than Starmer
If you had predicted this present stare of affairs on the 5th July most everyone would be astonished, and most sensible Labour supporters must be concerned at the present state of the party notwithstanding the few who seem to be in denial and keep maintaining nothing to see here
That said, I do wonder about student debt putting people off committing to another major long-term financial commitment (to say the least). And, of course, everyone's social media account these days seems to be full of folk having fun in exotic locations. Can't do that very easily with small kids in tow. Lifestyle choice. But easy to understand the regrets when 40+ and the attractiveness of the funky lifestyle starts fading somewhat...
Trump getting locked up may have nothing on this!
(Who knows, but stumbling blindly into 100k of gifts seems unlikely)
Looks like another massive error, might even have polling impact. Feeds into the narrative of flailing incompetence and bungling
It would be seen as a sign of utter weakness from a Labour PM and the redwall would switch en masse back to the Tories and Reform.
Not to mention the Falkland Islanders themselves would likely not accept being handed over to Argentina on a plate without a fight and would probably also go to war to defend themselves
Trump and other Republicans need to face both ways on this issue - the pro-life vote is important, but is very much a minority position. Polls in the US consistently show a healthy pro-choice majority (60%+). That's markedly different between parties, but you're still looking at 40% support among Republicans - they are much more divided than Democrats on this (where about 85% are pro-choice) and pro-choice Republican is very definitely a constituency Trump needs to hold onto.
His position has to be that this is a state rights issue, not a reproductive rights one. In front of Christian right audiences, he's often tempted to go further than that, causing him some issues for him. But it isn't unhelpful to him at all if Melania nods to the pro-choice side of the debate.
This was pretty uncomfortable for Trump in the debate with Harris. She scored some points pinning him more closely to the pro-life position than he'd like. It's a good issue for Democrats as it is a more divisive issue for Republicans than Democrats - they stand to gain a lot more reaching out to pro-choice Republicans than they stand to lose from pro-life Democrats.
"Then Brexit left many European nations reluctant to continue backing the UK’s stance in international forums."
Whoops
Online can verge into IRL though. I recall when you had your Covid jab on the day after me in the very same room, probably sitting on the very same chair. That was quite something.
“A big win for Mauritius: not only will the UK pay Port Louis for ‘taking back’ an archipelago it’d never held sovereignty* over, but they’ll now be able to extract lots of juicy Chinese aid in exchange for complicating** US/UK use of Diego Garcia… “
https://x.com/blagden_david/status/1841797012720644512?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
If something immediately feels like a monstrous and bewildering mistake, it usually turns out that it is
From Jezza Hunt.
‘We are moving in, as it happens this weekend. I had one or two other things on until then. We did go in though, just to have a look around the flat first and, of course, where did we want to go first? We wanted to go and see the wallpaper. The massive disappointment was to discover that that wallpaper – this may be a world exclusive – had started to peel off of its own accord and had actually been painted over by Liz Truss. So I will be saying to my children: scratch over there, there’s gold in them walls.’
Pro life evangelical turnout though is vital for Trump in many Midwestern and Southern swing states, if they stay home that could see Georgia and North Carolina (both in the top 10 states by evangelicals) in play for Harris and Walz. Evangelicals are already annoyed Trump isn't pushing for a Federal abortion ban after the SC repealed Roe v Wade, if his wife now pushes pro choice that will hurt him.
Last time a GOP nominee's wife was so vocally pro choice was Betty Ford in 1976 and Carter won with evangelicals not turning out for Ford
https://historicengland.org.uk/images-books/archive/collections/photographs/aw-hobart-air-pictures-portleven-collection/
The mill towns and villages in Lancashire and Yorkshire are particularly interesting.
Not even an indicted criminal, or self proclaimed Nazi...
Net Favorables:
T. Walz: Even
K. Harris: -1%
RFK Jr: -2%
Joe Biden: -7%
AOC: -9%
JD Vance: -9%
M. Johnson: -10%
C. Schumer: -11%
D. Trump: -11%
M. Robinson: -15%
J. Manchin: -16%
R. Giuliani: -25%
E. Adams: -28%
M. McConnell: -46%
YouGov / Oct 1, 2024 / n=1638
https://x.com/USA_Polling/status/1841566405084250543
United Kingdom – 3,000
Mauritius
Seychelles
Smaller populations:
France
Switzerland
Since there's more Chagossians here than Mauritius - why on earth does Mauritius get the islands ?!
Should have been a right to return for descendants, or cash in lieu (Since they're uninhabited and there's no infrastructure other than Diego Garcia which for obvious reasons is going to be fenced & guarded). Giving the islands to Mauritius is just preposterous to my mind and not in ours or the Chagos Islanders best interests.
I assume we will get the fine detail over the next few days.
Interesting that this has apparently come out of the blue with no indications it was happening until it was done. I thought the FO leaked like a sieve. Or is that only when it serves their own ends?
It has been challenged in Scotland and may yet have to be paid for this year, but the irony is that the drive to get pensioners signed up to pensioner's credit will evaporate the savings anyway
I resigned my membership of the conservative party at the time of the Johnson debacle and frankly am relieved they lost and have 5 years to try to become a one nation party, and if Cleverly becomes leader I will rejoin, but not with anyone else
As far as the pile on labour is concerned I mainly watch Sky news and the change in attitude from anti conservative to anti Labour is notable but maybe as journalists they are seeking gotchas and a successful gotcha of a PM or cabinet minister must be high in their playbook
- yes, but - I'm not sure in the developed world that's true.
Parenthood isn't really that bad a deal for women. I wouldn't volunteer for pregnancy and childbirth, but that is only a comparatively small part of parenthood - by far the bigger implication is the amount of resources you must pour into it, and that's true of both parents. Had I not had children, I reckon I could have been retiring in a year or two, rather than in 12-15 years. It's on the surface a bum deal for all parents. And yet the species has persisted, because actually, having children is brilliant for all sorts of reasons it's very hard to explain even to yourself, let alone anyone who doesn't have children.
And the number of women who reach the end of childrearing age by choice is demographically negligible. They are there, but they always have been. Far more common are the women who reach the end of childrearing age childless who wish it were not so.
Almost no-one regrets the children they had. But plenty regret the children they did not.
For the purposes of clarity, I'm not arguing that female emancipation is a bad thing. I'm arguing that I'm not satisfied with it as an argument for the decline in birth rate. Or at least, I'm not arguing that I'm satisfied with it as an argument for the rise in childlessness.
Absent a provision in her pre-nup (which I don't rule out), not sure these Republican "Friends of Gilead" quite have the sway over their chattels they used to.
Diego Garcia is 1339 miles from Mauritius.
We took control of it in 1965.
Prior to that there was no relationship between Mauritius and the Chagos islands of which Diego Garcia forms the most substantial part.
We took control from Mauritius which was then under our control as well but which has since become independent.
We, somewhat shamefully, removed the indigenous population from Diego Garcia to Mauritius, approximately 50 years ago. We then built a large base on the island that was also used by the Americans.
And now we are giving this to Mauritius.
This is slightly mad. If the indigenous population still wanted to return we perhaps had a moral responsibility to do that. If they wanted independence from us we should then respect that too. If they wanted to combine with Mauritius that would be up to them. But on what conceivable basis are we giving a country something it never had and to which it has no obvious claim?
The fierce battle over the 'Holy Grail' of shipwrecks
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/ckgn18xl3j7o
I think we should put in a claim, as a prize of war...
Starmer the human rights lawyer finishes because it makes him feel good
Female careers - both choice and necessity
leading to finite female caring/nurturing time
Education structure - female best years spent in education and career development
House prices and size
Lack of social housing
Uncertainty of renting sector
Marriage breakdown
Contraception and abortion
Discontent among women with men
Cost and difficulty of childcare
Cars and car seats - this imposes a convenience maximum of 2
The modern custom that children have their own individual room.
I am amazed that anyone has any at all.
Ford was a born-again Christian too, funnily enough, but was uncomfortable talking about it, and was a mid-westerner.
At least, that's the model that works in England.
"Oh, we can't give India and Pakistan independence, because it'll make us look like pussies!"
From the guardian:
“Chagossian Voices, a community organisation for Chagossians based in the UK and in several other countries, condemned the UK government’s lack of consultation with them before Thursday’s announcement.
It said: “Chagossian Voices deplore the exclusion of the Chagossian community from the negotiations which have produced this statement of intent concerning the sovereignty of our homeland. Chagossians have learned this outcome from the media and remain powerless and voiceless in determining our own future and the future of our homeland. The views of Chagossians, the Indigenous inhabitants of the islands, have been consistently and deliberately ignored and we demand full inclusion in the drafting of the treaty.”
https://www.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/rmgc-object-12027
Actually more seriously, my only real worry about this is what it will mean for the Marine Protection Area. It is currently the largest MPA in the world accounting for 50% of all No Take waters on the planet. The Mauritian Government have long objected to this and want to be able to fish there. This could be environmentally very bad.
I need a new nationality