You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I realised it really had become a sort of shibboleth of the Right, far beyond its true significance, when the Tories started demonising the RNLI. But then they also demonised the NT. I must have missed their demonisation of the WI, though.
For those following the ongoing CGT saga, the IFS is now recommending not only an increase to CGT to income tax levels, but also an exit tax. Oh, and an end to the various reliefs that currently exist for entrepreneurs...
As Sandpit has also said, I cannot think of a greater act of economic self harm than this. Sure, they may catch a few people if they go (though if implemented, I imagine it will be from April next year at the earliest as very likely to be challenged in court, leading to a stampede before then).
Our economic prospects have got so good we want to stop you taking your money out… it’s that thing isn’t it with capital instead of labour. Communist societies have walls to keep people in, capitalist ones have them, to keep people out.
The UK can kiss its wealth creators goodbye. The young and entrepreneurial minded will leave to start businesses elsewhere. They will catch a few people with money on their way out (although accounting tricks will be used to minimise the bill) and existing entrepreneurs will re-base elsewhere for their next venture.
We need to be encouraging wealth creators and entrepreneurs to come to the UK and make money, providing jobs and growing the economy. Instead we get 1000 boat people a day. Very few of which I imagine are wealth creators...
Immigrants tend to be those who get up off their arses rather than staying put. I'd be very surprised if they weren't more entrepreneurial on average than those who sit on their sofas and moan about the state of the world
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
Worth looking at the hgv blindspots on the TFL direct vision standard website. Huge blindspots directly in front and to the sides of HGVs with high driver positions. I get quite nervous if an HGV gets too close as I'm pretty certain that some fatalities were because the driver got so close that they couldn't see the vulnerable road user in front of them.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
My word, is she? I thought she'd just quit her job!
Now in charge of a table and chairs, 167K for that is not bad.
I wonder what her severance package will be, and her residual pensions benefits.
They are going to get it in the neck if this new made up on the spot job still pays the £170k a year.
A non-job that deserves a non-salary.
It does rather play into a big problem that we have seen consistently in both public and private sector jobs, failing doesn't really seem to come with consequences, they either get promoted up / sideways or they just pop up somewhere else e.g. Natwest Banking lady is back in cushy jobs.
For those following the ongoing CGT saga, the IFS is now recommending not only an increase to CGT to income tax levels, but also an exit tax. Oh, and an end to the various reliefs that currently exist for entrepreneurs...
As Sandpit has also said, I cannot think of a greater act of economic self harm than this. Sure, they may catch a few people if they go (though if implemented, I imagine it will be from April next year at the earliest as very likely to be challenged in court, leading to a stampede before then).
Our economic prospects have got so good we want to stop you taking your money out… it’s that thing isn’t it with capital instead of labour. Communist societies have walls to keep people in, capitalist ones have them, to keep people out.
The UK can kiss its wealth creators goodbye. The young and entrepreneurial minded will leave to start businesses elsewhere. They will catch a few people with money on their way out (although accounting tricks will be used to minimise the bill) and existing entrepreneurs will re-base elsewhere for their next venture.
We need to be encouraging wealth creators and entrepreneurs to come to the UK and make money, providing jobs and growing the economy. Instead we get 1000 boat people a day. Very few of which I imagine are wealth creators...
Immigrants tend to be those who get up off their arses rather than staying put. I'd be very surprised if they weren't more entrepreneurial on average than those who sit on their sofas and moan about the state of the world
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
Worth looking at the hgv blindspots on the TFL direct vision standard website. Huge blindspots directly in front and to the sides of HGVs with high driver positions. I get quite nervous if an HGV gets too close as I'm pretty certain that some fatalities were because the driver got so close that they couldn't see the vulnerable road user in front of them.
As I've said passim: I would have every learner driver sit in the cab of an HGV (probably simulator) and see how much vision they do, and do not, have. It might be good to extend that to cyclists as well...
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40.
And there we have it.
"Tory failings" is where your thinking starts, and stops.
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
In the case I mention, if that driver had hit that cyclist, the cycling lobby would have been automagically blaming the driver of either the oncoming car, the car being overtaken, or both.
In this case, the cyclist did a silly move; then, when it was obvious he had made a silly move, he did not back out, and instead continued on. This is a common feature of human nature: to compound mistakes. But he was probably in the blind spot of the driver he was overtaking (and had been for a good ten or fifteen seconds), and then veered into oncoming traffic.
I can easily point to many cases where drivers do wrong. But cyclists are vulnerable, and it is up to us to realise, like all road users, that they do not own the road. And that they, like other road users, can make mistakes.
I'm a firm believer in defensive driving. Cyclists should also believe in defensive riding. In far too many cases, they do not.
Who is this mythical cycling lobby? Views are pretty diverse about stuff like this, even inside my own group of cycling friends. Check out cycling forums - healthy debate about when to take the lane etc.
My general view is that most cyclists are acutely aware of how vulnerable they are and so this idea that they need to be more defensive is a bit overwrought, and applies only to a few thrill seekers. Also deliveroo guys, who are desperately trying to make some money so have an explanation, if not excuse.
It's that vulnerability that makes people become better drivers - I'm certainly better at checking my mirrors now I've started cycling a bit more. Why I like the idea that cycling should be part of the driving test (or at least the HGV test).
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
The thing is, the traffickers want to make money. They don't care about the law, local or international, which seems powerless against them, or the people they are trafficking.
Therefore they have an advantage. They can say and do anything they like, and can react much quicker than any law can. They allegedly advertise their services in various countries, and it is easy for them to make out that the UK is now an even easier touch now the Rwanda 'threat' has gone.
One change I'd do: ?Kirsty Alsop? recently got it in the neck from some (mostly on the left) for 'endangering' her child by letting her 15 year-old son go on a trip abroad alone. If that's endangerment, then any parent whose child dies on the crossing should be prosecuted for manslaughter.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
In the case I mention, if that driver had hit that cyclist, the cycling lobby would have been automagically blaming the driver of either the oncoming car, the car being overtaken, or both.
In this case, the cyclist did a silly move; then, when it was obvious he had made a silly move, he did not back out, and instead continued on. This is a common feature of human nature: to compound mistakes. But he was probably in the blind spot of the driver he was overtaking (and had been for a good ten or fifteen seconds), and then veered into oncoming traffic.
I can easily point to many cases where drivers do wrong. But cyclists are vulnerable, and it is up to us to realise, like all road users, that they do not own the road. And that they, like other road users, can make mistakes.
I'm a firm believer in defensive driving. Cyclists should also believe in defensive riding. In far too many cases, they do not.
Who is this mythical cycling lobby? Views are pretty diverse about stuff like this, even inside my own group of cycling friends. Check out cycling forums - healthy debate about when to take the lane etc.
My general view is that most cyclists are acutely aware of how vulnerable they are and so this idea that they need to be more defensive is a bit overwrought, and applies only to a few thrill seekers. Also deliveroo guys, who are desperately trying to make some money so have an explanation, if not excuse.
It's that vulnerability that makes people become better drivers - I'm certainly better at checking my mirrors now I've started cycling a bit more. Why I like the idea that cycling should be part of the driving test (or at least the HGV test).
I'm talking about the sort of lovely person who (say) blamed the lady in the Huntingdon incident, including stoopid claims like the 'fact' the pavement was a cyclepath. When it clearly was not.
So yeah, that sort of the cyclist-is-never-wrong dickhead. They're a danger to themselves and other cyclists.
Sue Gray is late sixties and successfully manoeuvred her son into Parliament, helped change the Government and professionalise Labour, and helped take down Boris to pave the road. Maybe she just decided she doesn’t fancy being the story and has done enough, and has just said “#### it I’m off”.
I suspect Starmer sacked Gray from her previous role, given she's been moved to a new role. It was probably a discussion on the lines of "This is not working out. What do you want to do about it?"
When she was first hired we were told that she would enable Starmer to hit the ground running with lots of well-planned legislation in his first 100 days in office. To say that it didn't work out is a bit of an understatement.
I think most of the new Labour government's problems are accounted for by very poor communications. Not the spectacles/freebies clusterfuck - no amount of comms can deal with that. But the other stuff is largely. Not spin. The government needs a public with no fixed view on the issues to give them a hearing, so the public can understand why the government is doing what it's doing whether they agree with them or not. In a political context where many commentators naturally have an agenda. I think Starmer is surprisingly naive about this.
Not sure the government is selling £22 billion spent on carbon capture, no matter how good the comms tream.
And as for granny dying of hyperthermia to pay for it, your comms team would rather resign en masse than try to sell that.
What we have is the New Coke of governments. "This is going to be so much better than what went before!"
Is it shite...
Not my area of expertise but let me attempt a comms on your two examples. Remember we're trying to get a hearing from people who have no fixed views.
£22 billion investment into carbon capture. If the £22 billion number is problematic, as your post implies, don't use it. Your comms have already improved. In any case it's almost certainly a made up number. Talk about why you are doing it, who will be using it and how it eventually gets paid for - there's a big difference between investment and subsidy. The government used "investment" but people are interpreting it as subsidy. Maybe focus on the immediate projects in Teesside. Incidentally I just googled this "investment" and I'm none the wiser, which goes to show how woeful the comms actually is.
Winter Fuel Payments. This government will always aim to get the best value for taxpayers. It's not right that taxpayers struggling with the cost of living are providing handouts to pensioners with gold Rolex watches. We will instead focus the money on pensioners who need it.
The message is simple in this case. Thing is, they are not saying it.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
The numbers are still ahead of 2023, and this isn’t counting the bountiful day yesterday:
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
For those following the ongoing CGT saga, the IFS is now recommending not only an increase to CGT to income tax levels, but also an exit tax. Oh, and an end to the various reliefs that currently exist for entrepreneurs...
As Sandpit has also said, I cannot think of a greater act of economic self harm than this. Sure, they may catch a few people if they go (though if implemented, I imagine it will be from April next year at the earliest as very likely to be challenged in court, leading to a stampede before then).
Our economic prospects have got so good we want to stop you taking your money out… it’s that thing isn’t it with capital instead of labour. Communist societies have walls to keep people in, capitalist ones have them, to keep people out.
The UK can kiss its wealth creators goodbye. The young and entrepreneurial minded will leave to start businesses elsewhere. They will catch a few people with money on their way out (although accounting tricks will be used to minimise the bill) and existing entrepreneurs will re-base elsewhere for their next venture.
We need to be encouraging wealth creators and entrepreneurs to come to the UK and make money, providing jobs and growing the economy. Instead we get 1000 boat people a day. Very few of which I imagine are wealth creators...
Immigrants tend to be those who get up off their arses rather than staying put. I'd be very surprised if they weren't more entrepreneurial on average than those who sit on their sofas and moan about the state of the world
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
Worth looking at the hgv blindspots on the TFL direct vision standard website. Huge blindspots directly in front and to the sides of HGVs with high driver positions. I get quite nervous if an HGV gets too close as I'm pretty certain that some fatalities were because the driver got so close that they couldn't see the vulnerable road user in front of them.
As I've said passim: I would have every learner driver sit in the cab of an HGV (probably simulator) and see how much vision they do, and do not, have. It might be good to extend that to cyclists as well...
That's why you have ASL for cyclists, and why suggesting this cyclist put herself in a vulnerable position by using the ASL is so unfair, IMO.
The point of the ASL is to mitigate the visibility problems you can have from large vehicles. The driver intruded into it and the mitigation was undermined.
I've started reporting lorry drivers who do the same to the Police Scotland on this basis.
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
That's an incredibly sad case. I also note the age of the lorry driver - 69 - and the fact that he had health problems including high blood pressure and anxiety, neither of which in themselves would have necessarily contributed to the accident, but it does raise the question for me of the possible need for health and capability assessments for older drivers, or, indeed, all drivers, on a more frequent basis. And how many of us existing drivers of many years would pass the current theory test?
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
The thing is, the traffickers want to make money. They don't care about the law, local or international, which seems powerless against them, or the people they are trafficking.
Therefore they have an advantage. They can say and do anything they like, and can react much quicker than any law can. They allegedly advertise their services in various countries, and it is easy for them to make out that the UK is now an even easier touch now the Rwanda 'threat' has gone.
One change I'd do: ?Kirsty Alsop? recently got it in the neck from some (mostly on the left) for 'endangering' her child by letting her 15 year-old son go on a trip abroad alone. If that's endangerment, then any parent whose child dies on the crossing should be prosecuted for manslaughter.
Yes, it’s a supply chain problem. These crossings are well organised. They require (and presumably get) focused espionage and policing across Europe, and sanctions against manufacturers.
Demand side policies like Rwanda seek to reduce the pull factors, and might have an effect, but in drug war terms they’re a bit like prison sentences for possession by end users.
For those following the ongoing CGT saga, the IFS is now recommending not only an increase to CGT to income tax levels, but also an exit tax. Oh, and an end to the various reliefs that currently exist for entrepreneurs...
As Sandpit has also said, I cannot think of a greater act of economic self harm than this. Sure, they may catch a few people if they go (though if implemented, I imagine it will be from April next year at the earliest as very likely to be challenged in court, leading to a stampede before then).
Our economic prospects have got so good we want to stop you taking your money out… it’s that thing isn’t it with capital instead of labour. Communist societies have walls to keep people in, capitalist ones have them, to keep people out.
The UK can kiss its wealth creators goodbye. The young and entrepreneurial minded will leave to start businesses elsewhere. They will catch a few people with money on their way out (although accounting tricks will be used to minimise the bill) and existing entrepreneurs will re-base elsewhere for their next venture.
We need to be encouraging wealth creators and entrepreneurs to come to the UK and make money, providing jobs and growing the economy. Instead we get 1000 boat people a day. Very few of which I imagine are wealth creators...
Immigrants tend to be those who get up off their arses rather than staying put. I'd be very surprised if they weren't more entrepreneurial on average than those who sit on their sofas and moan about the state of the world
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
Worth looking at the hgv blindspots on the TFL direct vision standard website. Huge blindspots directly in front and to the sides of HGVs with high driver positions. I get quite nervous if an HGV gets too close as I'm pretty certain that some fatalities were because the driver got so close that they couldn't see the vulnerable road user in front of them.
As I've said passim: I would have every learner driver sit in the cab of an HGV (probably simulator) and see how much vision they do, and do not, have. It might be good to extend that to cyclists as well...
That's why you have ASL for cyclists, and why suggesting this cyclist put herself in a vulnerable position by using the ASL is so unfair, IMO.
The point of the ASL is to mitigate the visibility problems you can have from large vehicles. The driver intruded into it and the mitigation was undermined.
I've started reporting lorry drivers who do the same to the Police Scotland on this basis.
I'd love you to wear a camera every time you cycle and post all the footage online, so we can report you *when* you make mistakes....
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
The Tories are no longer interested in the truth, they prefer their own narratives. I thought CR might be more intelligent than that, but it seems not.
The truth is that there is no detectable change in the number of small boat arrivals as a result of the change in government. Abandoning the Rwanda scheme has not made a jot of difference.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
The Tories are no longer interested in the truth, they prefer their own narratives. I thought CR might be more intelligent than that, but it seems not.
The truth is that there is no detectable change in the number of small boat arrivals as a result of the change in government. Abandoning the Rwanda scheme has not made a jot of difference.
I don’t think it’s easy to say that. The counterfactual where the scheme actually went ahead may have reduced crossings. Let’s not forget that the scheme never actually entered operations, so the deterrent wasn’t there.
Sue Grey leaving worries me, looks like the anonymous briefers have won. Does not speak of a happy #10 operation, and given they have just won an election, you'd have thought they would still be relatively happy with each other. A shakeup to the comms machine seems needed, something isn't quite working.
What ultimately matters though is Starmer and Reeves delivering a good budget which sets the country back on the economic growth path. No amount of comms will fix another 5 years of decline.
The problem for the Cons is that the main factions are the mad Reformites, the Cons right or wrong lack of thinkers, and the sensible, intelligent, dashing Cameroon remain types.
The first group are with Reform, the second with the Cons, and the third split between the Cons, homeless, and perhaps the LDs.
There is no way that these groups can coexist so the Cons are fucked.
Underpinning the Conservative century was that they were broadly united and their opponents were divided, usually very inefficiently. That's no longer true, and I don't see an easy way to put Humpty Dumpty together again.
Reverse was true in the liberal nineteenth century
'One might, at a stretch, understand that the BBC would interview #Khamenei, the leader of #Iran. But to broadcast, as is, 45 min of a speech praising Oct 7 & advocating for the eradication of #Israel is nothing less than glorifying terrorism. Would you have, in 1939, servilely relayed Hitler's words?'
Garry Kasparov:
Inexcusable. Best response I saw, "The BBC used to be the Mecca of journalism. Now it's just Mecca."
At some point all those clever enlightened liberals are going to have to accept that criticism of auntie how goes beyond the Tories and Reform.
For those following the ongoing CGT saga, the IFS is now recommending not only an increase to CGT to income tax levels, but also an exit tax. Oh, and an end to the various reliefs that currently exist for entrepreneurs...
As Sandpit has also said, I cannot think of a greater act of economic self harm than this. Sure, they may catch a few people if they go (though if implemented, I imagine it will be from April next year at the earliest as very likely to be challenged in court, leading to a stampede before then).
Our economic prospects have got so good we want to stop you taking your money out… it’s that thing isn’t it with capital instead of labour. Communist societies have walls to keep people in, capitalist ones have them, to keep people out.
The UK can kiss its wealth creators goodbye. The young and entrepreneurial minded will leave to start businesses elsewhere. They will catch a few people with money on their way out (although accounting tricks will be used to minimise the bill) and existing entrepreneurs will re-base elsewhere for their next venture.
We need to be encouraging wealth creators and entrepreneurs to come to the UK and make money, providing jobs and growing the economy. Instead we get 1000 boat people a day. Very few of which I imagine are wealth creators...
Immigrants tend to be those who get up off their arses rather than staying put. I'd be very surprised if they weren't more entrepreneurial on average than those who sit on their sofas and moan about the state of the world
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
Worth looking at the hgv blindspots on the TFL direct vision standard website. Huge blindspots directly in front and to the sides of HGVs with high driver positions. I get quite nervous if an HGV gets too close as I'm pretty certain that some fatalities were because the driver got so close that they couldn't see the vulnerable road user in front of them.
As I've said passim: I would have every learner driver sit in the cab of an HGV (probably simulator) and see how much vision they do, and do not, have. It might be good to extend that to cyclists as well...
That's why you have ASL for cyclists, and why suggesting this cyclist put herself in a vulnerable position by using the ASL is so unfair, IMO.
The point of the ASL is to mitigate the visibility problems you can have from large vehicles. The driver intruded into it and the mitigation was undermined.
I've started reporting lorry drivers who do the same to the Police Scotland on this basis.
Just overheard a hearty rendition of happy birthday to you coming from a pub.
Surely the most universal, most sung, least controversial song in world history.
(Please now find an example of the happy birthday wars or a religious sect that considers it blasphemous, as must surely exist).
It was at one point involved in controversy because Warner claimed to own the copyright to it and were claiming $2 million a year for uses of it in commercial contexts until they lost a lawsuit about it: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-34332853
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
Despite the increasingly desperate subsampling and frothing, Labour have a notable lead with all pollsters, a parliamentary majority of 172, and five years to a general election. All this after a bunch of over-excitable hypocrites from the media have been chasing Lady Vic around Selfridges for weeks on end and whining about the removal of iniquitous freebies.
Sir Keir will be pretty happy. The PB Tories might be spitting, but who really cares about those hilarious losers?
You’ve never answered my question about freebie-gate.
I don’t care whether it is in the rules or not. I don’t care about the impact on the polls.
Do you think it is *right* that the PM and other senior ministers should be accepting expensive gifts from an individual?
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
The point is, yesterday was the highest number for Starmer as PM.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
The BBC article has more up to date numbers showing the 2024 figures are ahead, and these don’t include the latest days with hundreds of crossings. It’s wrong to say the numbers are lower.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
Starmer has taken no initiatives whatsoever since taking office other than cancelling Rwanda. Sunak had already achieved reductions in 2024 prior to losing office.
So what you're seeing here is the effect of his initiatives ameliorated by an increase the other way by Starmer taking the brakes off.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
The point is, yesterday was the highest number for Starmer as PM.
The trend is not your friend.
We’ll see. It beats any single days in 2023 (but on a weekly basis 2023 had several bigger ones) but undershoots a number of 4 figure days in 2021 and 2022.
What I think it highlights is a deliberate tactic developing by the traffickers. Weekdays with zero crossings, even in calm weather (mid last week was pretty calm on the channel) then a big regatta, like a sort of reverse Dunkirk.
Past years have seen big numbers even into November and if the boats are larger now then sea conditions may play less of a part.
I think the locals will be fine for the Tories, but it's spot-on to say the party absolutely loves pissing contests, factionalism and votes of no confidence - rather than thinking and pulling together - so, sadly, I think this is very likely.
I hold out little hope.
The 2025 elections are the county elections from 2021 where Covid ensured the Tories did very well. It's going to be bad for the Tories as they tend Lib Dem or Reform..
Boosted by the credibility of having a LibDem MP, in many cases the first in a century, I’d hope for some impressive LibDem results in the Home Counties.
The LDs already got 17% in the 2021 local elections and are polling less than that now. Labour are polling about the NEV they got in 2021 with the Tories down on then.
I would expect the biggest gainers on votes and seats in the county council elections next year to be Reform with them already on 20% with Opinium
Another post of yours to save….
Reminder to HYUFD that the Lib Dems always outperform Westminster polling at local elections.
If they’re on 13-14% in the polls I’d expect 18-19% in the locals.
Greens will do very well too. Labour will do calamatously, I think. Tories will perform reasonably well and Reform will underperform polling but consolidate in their heartlands.
Exactly. And he knows this - I had exactly the same argument with him on the run-up to the 2023 local elections, where he insisted that the LDs would crater because they were averaging only 10% in polls at the time.
Looking at the 2021 Local Elections, the average LD polling score in the month leading up to them was only 7.4%, with a maximum of 10% and a minimum of 5%
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
The BBC article has more up to date numbers showing the 2024 figures are ahead, and these don’t include the latest days with hundreds of crossings. It’s wrong to say the numbers are lower.
I think the locals will be fine for the Tories, but it's spot-on to say the party absolutely loves pissing contests, factionalism and votes of no confidence - rather than thinking and pulling together - so, sadly, I think this is very likely.
I hold out little hope.
The 2025 elections are the county elections from 2021 where Covid ensured the Tories did very well. It's going to be bad for the Tories as they tend Lib Dem or Reform..
Boosted by the credibility of having a LibDem MP, in many cases the first in a century, I’d hope for some impressive LibDem results in the Home Counties.
The LDs already got 17% in the 2021 local elections and are polling less than that now. Labour are polling about the NEV they got in 2021 with the Tories down on then.
I would expect the biggest gainers on votes and seats in the county council elections next year to be Reform with them already on 20% with Opinium
Another post of yours to save….
Reminder to HYUFD that the Lib Dems always outperform Westminster polling at local elections.
If they’re on 13-14% in the polls I’d expect 18-19% in the locals.
Greens will do very well too. Labour will do calamatously, I think. Tories will perform reasonably well and Reform will underperform polling but consolidate in their heartlands.
Exactly. And he knows this - I had exactly the same argument with him on the run-up to the 2023 local elections, where he insisted that the LDs would crater because they were averaging only 10% in polls at the time.
Looking at the 2021 Local Elections, the average LD polling score in the month leading up to them was only 7.4%, with a maximum of 10% and a minimum of 5%
It would be interesting to see the stats. I assume the gap to polling is bigger when rural or suburban seats are up for election than when it’s an urban locals.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
The BBC article has more up to date numbers showing the 2024 figures are ahead, and these don’t include the latest days with hundreds of crossings. It’s wrong to say the numbers are lower.
We’re both right. BBC is quoting year to date (which includes the first 6 months pre election), I am quoting post 4 July.
Dividing the year like that is difficult since it’s right in the middle of the crossing season, and you’ll be very sensitive to exactly where you put the cut-off. There’s a reason why it’s always done on a yearly basis: hardly anyone is crossing in the depths of winter.
The statistics show that this year is a bit worse than the last, and based on the gradient of the curve it looks like things are getting worse rather than improving.
Sue Grey leaving worries me, looks like the anonymous briefers have won. Does not speak of a happy #10 operation, and given they have just won an election, you'd have thought they would still be relatively happy with each other. A shakeup to the comms machine seems needed, something isn't quite working.
What ultimately matters though is Starmer and Reeves delivering a good budget which sets the country back on the economic growth path. No amount of comms will fix another 5 years of decline.
The budget is going to be very tricky. If Rachel goes full 'Iron Chancellor' then it could send Labour's popularity into freefall, possibly to Black Wednesday levels from which recovery is impossible. If she goes soft then she'll be a lame duck from the outset. A real dilemma,
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
Starmer has taken no initiatives whatsoever since taking office other than cancelling Rwanda. Sunak had already achieved reductions in 2024 prior to losing office.
So what you're seeing here is the effect of his initiatives ameliorated by an increase the other way by Starmer taking the brakes off.
My own supposition - and that’s all if can be, what do we really know about what’s happening in the underworld - is that the ebbs and flows are driven by a mixture of
- source region push in the previous year - traffickers’ sophistication and tactics - French and UK police effectiveness in countering these
It’s possible for example that you could see a sudden crash in numbers randomly because of some major gang war wiping out the ringleaders, and nobody would ever know. Or a sudden big surge because traffickers had got a big delivery of new boats theyd been waiting for.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
The point is, yesterday was the highest number for Starmer as PM.
The trend is not your friend.
We’ll see. It beats any single days in 2023 (but on a weekly basis 2023 had several bigger ones) but undershoots a number of 4 figure days in 2021 and 2022.
What I think it highlights is a deliberate tactic developing by the traffickers. Weekdays with zero crossings, even in calm weather (mid last week was pretty calm on the channel) then a big regatta, like a sort of reverse Dunkirk.
Past years have seen big numbers even into November and if the boats are larger now then sea conditions may play less of a part.
There is something of a phoney war right now - the traffickeers sounding out Starmer. If he takes no meaningful steps to intervene, I expct the numbers to become significantly larger. The demand is there, the people with boats are there, so if the measures to stop them aren't...
Sue Grey leaving worries me, looks like the anonymous briefers have won. Does not speak of a happy #10 operation, and given they have just won an election, you'd have thought they would still be relatively happy with each other. A shakeup to the comms machine seems needed, something isn't quite working.
What ultimately matters though is Starmer and Reeves delivering a good budget which sets the country back on the economic growth path. No amount of comms will fix another 5 years of decline.
The budget is going to be very tricky. If Rachel goes full 'Iron Chancellor' then it could send Labour's popularity into freefall, possibly to Black Wednesday levels from which recovery is impossible. If she goes soft then she'll be a lame duck from the outset. A real dilemma,
Governments who know they're on the way out have an annoying habit of cynically salting the wells for their successors. Gordon Brown and the 50p tax rate. Major/Clarke and the spending limits that Labour had pledged to follow. Home/Maudling and the inflationary budgets.
But even allowing for that, and allowing for the fact that many things were wrong with the economy that were not their fault, the Sunak/Hunt performance was exceptional.
Reeves is left with bad options and worse ones. So far, she seems intent on doing the worse ones.
Just overheard a hearty rendition of happy birthday to you coming from a pub.
Surely the most universal, most sung, least controversial song in world history.
(Please now find an example of the happy birthday wars or a religious sect that considers it blasphemous, as must surely exist).
There is a whole episode of Sports Night about it.
The song is copyright. You need a performing rights license to sing it in public...
The shallowest dip into Google indicates that you should not enter into singing this at your daughter's fourth birthday without consulting an expensive copyright lawyer. (that's the only sort there is).
Re the original question, contemplate this horror from the Jehovah Witness website:
"Jehovah’s Witnesses do not celebrate birthdays because we believe that such celebrations displease God."
I think the locals will be fine for the Tories, but it's spot-on to say the party absolutely loves pissing contests, factionalism and votes of no confidence - rather than thinking and pulling together - so, sadly, I think this is very likely.
I hold out little hope.
The 2025 elections are the county elections from 2021 where Covid ensured the Tories did very well. It's going to be bad for the Tories as they tend Lib Dem or Reform..
Boosted by the credibility of having a LibDem MP, in many cases the first in a century, I’d hope for some impressive LibDem results in the Home Counties.
The LDs already got 17% in the 2021 local elections and are polling less than that now. Labour are polling about the NEV they got in 2021 with the Tories down on then.
I would expect the biggest gainers on votes and seats in the county council elections next year to be Reform with them already on 20% with Opinium
Another post of yours to save….
Reminder to HYUFD that the Lib Dems always outperform Westminster polling at local elections.
If they’re on 13-14% in the polls I’d expect 18-19% in the locals.
Greens will do very well too. Labour will do calamatously, I think. Tories will perform reasonably well and Reform will underperform polling but consolidate in their heartlands.
Exactly. And he knows this - I had exactly the same argument with him on the run-up to the 2023 local elections, where he insisted that the LDs would crater because they were averaging only 10% in polls at the time.
Looking at the 2021 Local Elections, the average LD polling score in the month leading up to them was only 7.4%, with a maximum of 10% and a minimum of 5%
It would be interesting to see the stats. I assume the gap to polling is bigger when rural or suburban seats are up for election than when it’s an urban locals.
Because I looked back at my own posts arguing with him at the time, I happened to have them to hand (taken to 1 significant figure, and with 2023 and 2024 added on since then):
2024: Polling share 9%; LE vote share 17% 2023: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 20% 2022: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 19% 2021: Polling share 7%; LE vote share 17% 2020: Not available 2019: Polling share 9%; LE vote share 19% 2018: Polling share 8%; LE vote share 16% 2017: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 18% 2016: Polling share 7%; LE vote share 15%
I think the locals will be fine for the Tories, but it's spot-on to say the party absolutely loves pissing contests, factionalism and votes of no confidence - rather than thinking and pulling together - so, sadly, I think this is very likely.
I hold out little hope.
The 2025 elections are the county elections from 2021 where Covid ensured the Tories did very well. It's going to be bad for the Tories as they tend Lib Dem or Reform..
Boosted by the credibility of having a LibDem MP, in many cases the first in a century, I’d hope for some impressive LibDem results in the Home Counties.
The LDs already got 17% in the 2021 local elections and are polling less than that now. Labour are polling about the NEV they got in 2021 with the Tories down on then.
I would expect the biggest gainers on votes and seats in the county council elections next year to be Reform with them already on 20% with Opinium
Another post of yours to save….
Reminder to HYUFD that the Lib Dems always outperform Westminster polling at local elections.
If they’re on 13-14% in the polls I’d expect 18-19% in the locals.
Greens will do very well too. Labour will do calamatously, I think. Tories will perform reasonably well and Reform will underperform polling but consolidate in their heartlands.
Exactly. And he knows this - I had exactly the same argument with him on the run-up to the 2023 local elections, where he insisted that the LDs would crater because they were averaging only 10% in polls at the time.
Looking at the 2021 Local Elections, the average LD polling score in the month leading up to them was only 7.4%, with a maximum of 10% and a minimum of 5%
It would be interesting to see the stats. I assume the gap to polling is bigger when rural or suburban seats are up for election than when it’s an urban locals.
Because I looked back at my own posts arguing with him at the time, I happened to have them to hand (taken to 1 significant figure, and with 2023 and 2024 added on since then):
2024: Polling share 9%; LE vote share 17% 2023: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 20% 2022: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 19% 2021: Polling share 7%; LE vote share 17% 2020: Not available 2019: Polling share 9%; LE vote share 19% 2018: Polling share 8%; LE vote share 16% 2017: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 18% 2016: Polling share 7%; LE vote share 15%
No obvious pattern there between the types of councils up, but maybe a trend of the gap getting larger.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
The BBC article has more up to date numbers showing the 2024 figures are ahead, and these don’t include the latest days with hundreds of crossings. It’s wrong to say the numbers are lower.
We’re both right. BBC is quoting year to date (which includes the first 6 months pre election), I am quoting post 4 July.
Dividing the year like that is difficult since it’s right in the middle of the crossing season, and you’ll be very sensitive to exactly where you put the cut-off. There’s a reason why it’s always done on a yearly basis: hardly anyone is crossing in the depths of winter.
The statistics show that this year is a bit worse than the last, and based on the gradient of the curve it looks like things are getting worse rather than improving.
This reminds me of global warming discussions! Eyeballing a graph. Not helped by 2024 being unsmoothed and the others being smoothed.
Things slowed down a lot from Oct-Dec last year, unlike 2022. So that may explain Labour silence on the lower rates during the summer.
I think the locals will be fine for the Tories, but it's spot-on to say the party absolutely loves pissing contests, factionalism and votes of no confidence - rather than thinking and pulling together - so, sadly, I think this is very likely.
I hold out little hope.
The 2025 elections are the county elections from 2021 where Covid ensured the Tories did very well. It's going to be bad for the Tories as they tend Lib Dem or Reform..
Boosted by the credibility of having a LibDem MP, in many cases the first in a century, I’d hope for some impressive LibDem results in the Home Counties.
The LDs already got 17% in the 2021 local elections and are polling less than that now. Labour are polling about the NEV they got in 2021 with the Tories down on then.
I would expect the biggest gainers on votes and seats in the county council elections next year to be Reform with them already on 20% with Opinium
Another post of yours to save….
Reminder to HYUFD that the Lib Dems always outperform Westminster polling at local elections.
If they’re on 13-14% in the polls I’d expect 18-19% in the locals.
Greens will do very well too. Labour will do calamatously, I think. Tories will perform reasonably well and Reform will underperform polling but consolidate in their heartlands.
Exactly. And he knows this - I had exactly the same argument with him on the run-up to the 2023 local elections, where he insisted that the LDs would crater because they were averaging only 10% in polls at the time.
Looking at the 2021 Local Elections, the average LD polling score in the month leading up to them was only 7.4%, with a maximum of 10% and a minimum of 5%
It would be interesting to see the stats. I assume the gap to polling is bigger when rural or suburban seats are up for election than when it’s an urban locals.
Because I looked back at my own posts arguing with him at the time, I happened to have them to hand (taken to 1 significant figure, and with 2023 and 2024 added on since then):
2024: Polling share 9%; LE vote share 17% 2023: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 20% 2022: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 19% 2021: Polling share 7%; LE vote share 17% 2020: Not available 2019: Polling share 9%; LE vote share 19% 2018: Polling share 8%; LE vote share 16% 2017: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 18% 2016: Polling share 7%; LE vote share 15%
So no pattern. Just a 10% or 8% bump every time (and never a 9% one…)
Sue Grey leaving worries me, looks like the anonymous briefers have won. Does not speak of a happy #10 operation, and given they have just won an election, you'd have thought they would still be relatively happy with each other. A shakeup to the comms machine seems needed, something isn't quite working.
What ultimately matters though is Starmer and Reeves delivering a good budget which sets the country back on the economic growth path. No amount of comms will fix another 5 years of decline.
The budget is going to be very tricky. If Rachel goes full 'Iron Chancellor' then it could send Labour's popularity into freefall, possibly to Black Wednesday levels from which recovery is impossible. If she goes soft then she'll be a lame duck from the outset. A real dilemma,
Governments who know they're on the way out have an annoying habit of cynically salting the wells for their successors. Gordon Brown and the 50p tax rate. Major/Clarke and the spending limits that Labour had pledged to follow. Home/Maudling and the inflationary budgets.
But even allowing for that, and allowing for the fact that many things were wrong with the economy that were not their fault, the Sunak/Hunt performance was exceptional.
Reeves is left with bad options and worse ones. So far, she seems intent on doing the worse ones.
You haven't said in terms how Sunak/Hunt "salted the well" in your opinion
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
The BBC article has more up to date numbers showing the 2024 figures are ahead, and these don’t include the latest days with hundreds of crossings. It’s wrong to say the numbers are lower.
We’re both right. BBC is quoting year to date (which includes the first 6 months pre election), I am quoting post 4 July.
Dividing the year like that is difficult since it’s right in the middle of the crossing season, and you’ll be very sensitive to exactly where you put the cut-off. There’s a reason why it’s always done on a yearly basis: hardly anyone is crossing in the depths of winter.
The statistics show that this year is a bit worse than the last, and based on the gradient of the curve it looks like things are getting worse rather than improving.
This reminds me of global warming discussions! Eyeballing a graph. Not helped by 2024 being unsmoothed and the others being smoothed.
Things slowed down a lot from Oct-Dec last year, unlike 2022. So that may explain Labour silence on the lower rates during the summer.
I think the point about putting the dividing line in the middle of the year is perfectly valid, especially as these occur in batches (e.g. 1000 yesterday), rather than it being a steady number each day.
Regarding whether things are getting worse, if you add the latest crossings onto the BBC chart, the gap between 2023 and 2024 will be worsening, not improving.
Sue Grey leaving worries me, looks like the anonymous briefers have won. Does not speak of a happy #10 operation, and given they have just won an election, you'd have thought they would still be relatively happy with each other. A shakeup to the comms machine seems needed, something isn't quite working.
What ultimately matters though is Starmer and Reeves delivering a good budget which sets the country back on the economic growth path. No amount of comms will fix another 5 years of decline.
The budget is going to be very tricky. If Rachel goes full 'Iron Chancellor' then it could send Labour's popularity into freefall, possibly to Black Wednesday levels from which recovery is impossible. If she goes soft then she'll be a lame duck from the outset. A real dilemma,
I don't see it that way. If she sticks to her fiscal rules, then we won't be able to invest sufficiently to grow the economy. Labour will have little progress to show in 5 years. If she borrows *to invest* in projects which generate a return, then we can get back to economic growth. She has to think longterm.
You’re welcome to post some alternative facts, but the official ones show a run rate ahead of 2023 in the year to 4 July, and behind 2024 since.
That doesn’t mean boat crossings have gone away as a problem. But it does rather make “Starmer has lost control” narratives look a bit like…spinning.
I've seen the stats. They don't show anything of the kind.
Your thesis is that any reduction in boat crossings up until 4th July 2023 was nothing whatever to do with Sunak, and any reductions in crossings since (of which there have been precisely none) are down to the genius of Starmer.
It's laughable.
One of the first things Starmer did was junk Rwanda. The message has gone out far and wide that migrants are welcome here, and they've heard it and continue to come in droves.
Don’t be ridiculous. Read my first post on the subject, hours ago this morning, where I said: “it’s too early for this to be anything to do with the new government”. I think I also mentioned the Albania deal.
I find the small boats phenomenon fascinating, and rather sad at times. I’m not so politically invested in it as some. In the long list of Tory failings it doesn’t even make the Vodafone Top 40. I do think the patterns of the last few years make for an interesting case study.
It’s a shame the topic can’t be discussed dispassionately.
I am not sure that is necessarily the case. I can see an argument for saying that the well advertised repeal of the Rwanda policy (a repeal I thoroughly agree with) could have encouraged an immediate increase in numbers attempting to cross in small boats. It all depends on whether the original policy was acting as a deterent or not. I don't know if it was so am unable to answer the point factually. But in principle I can certainly see how an imediate action by the incoming Government might have an immediatem material effect on boat numbers.
You’d think so, but the point is the numbers are *down* since the election. We were running above 2023 up to then, and well behind since. It’s possible Yvette got to work smashing the gangs on day one with immediate effect but it seems unlikely.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
Numbers are not down since the election.
That is simply factually untrue.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2023: 13,897 Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
Starmer has taken no initiatives whatsoever since taking office other than cancelling Rwanda. Sunak had already achieved reductions in 2024 prior to losing office.
So what you're seeing here is the effect of his initiatives ameliorated by an increase the other way by Starmer taking the brakes off.
My own supposition - and that’s all if can be, what do we really know about what’s happening in the underworld - is that the ebbs and flows are driven by a mixture of
- source region push in the previous year - traffickers’ sophistication and tactics - French and UK police effectiveness in countering these
It’s possible for example that you could see a sudden crash in numbers randomly because of some major gang war wiping out the ringleaders, and nobody would ever know. Or a sudden big surge because traffickers had got a big delivery of new boats theyd been waiting for.
Scenario: the trafficking gang leaders suddenly start turning up very dead, in large numbers. Word is a new bunch of thugs are muscling in on their patch. "The Hereford Crew"...
The French seem as inept at catching the Hereford Crew as they are the previous crop of traffickers. Word is "Hereford" have a boat division. They are letting far far few boats across - and demanding a twenty-fold increase in crossing fees. You REALLY have to want to cross.
Strangely, the British seem to know exactly where and when these crossings are going to happen. Most of the boats get met at the beach.
Freelancers up in Belgium have tried a new operation, to undercut Hereford. But have come to a similar messy end as their French counterparts.
Word is Hereford have done a deal with the local gendarmes to "do a Nelson". Anyway, crossings are massively down, but the local cops seem happy enough in their shiny new cars.
Sue Grey leaving worries me, looks like the anonymous briefers have won. Does not speak of a happy #10 operation, and given they have just won an election, you'd have thought they would still be relatively happy with each other. A shakeup to the comms machine seems needed, something isn't quite working.
What ultimately matters though is Starmer and Reeves delivering a good budget which sets the country back on the economic growth path. No amount of comms will fix another 5 years of decline.
The budget is going to be very tricky. If Rachel goes full 'Iron Chancellor' then it could send Labour's popularity into freefall, possibly to Black Wednesday levels from which recovery is impossible. If she goes soft then she'll be a lame duck from the outset. A real dilemma,
Sue Grey leaving worries me, looks like the anonymous briefers have won. Does not speak of a happy #10 operation, and given they have just won an election, you'd have thought they would still be relatively happy with each other. A shakeup to the comms machine seems needed, something isn't quite working.
What ultimately matters though is Starmer and Reeves delivering a good budget which sets the country back on the economic growth path. No amount of comms will fix another 5 years of decline.
The budget is going to be very tricky. If Rachel goes full 'Iron Chancellor' then it could send Labour's popularity into freefall, possibly to Black Wednesday levels from which recovery is impossible. If she goes soft then she'll be a lame duck from the outset. A real dilemma,
I don't see it that way. If she sticks to her fiscal rules, then we won't be able to invest sufficiently to grow the economy. Labour will have little progress to show in 5 years. If she borrows *to invest* in projects which generate a return, then we can get back to economic growth. She has to think longterm.
If she wallops taxes up she will kill off what little growth potential there is. Brain drain of young, intelligent grads who can't even afford a four person house share in London buggering off to Dubai, plus entrepreneurs rebasing themselves out of the UK, plus non doms fleeing.
Meanwhile we continue to import people who are a drain on the country's coffers while giving productive contributors every possible encouragement to leave.
And if she doesn't wallop taxes up after all her hard talk, she will be seen as a lame duck.
Her own rules have tied her hands behind her back. Reverting the 2% NI cut alone would solve most of her problems but income tax, NI and VAT changes have already been ruled out.
Just overheard a hearty rendition of happy birthday to you coming from a pub.
Surely the most universal, most sung, least controversial song in world history.
(Please now find an example of the happy birthday wars or a religious sect that considers it blasphemous, as must surely exist).
It was a really controversial song in the US for several decades, restaurant staff were barred from singing it because of a somewhat vexatious record company who claimed it was their copyrighted work. It was finally put into the public domain in 2015.
For those following the ongoing CGT saga, the IFS is now recommending not only an increase to CGT to income tax levels, but also an exit tax. Oh, and an end to the various reliefs that currently exist for entrepreneurs...
As Sandpit has also said, I cannot think of a greater act of economic self harm than this. Sure, they may catch a few people if they go (though if implemented, I imagine it will be from April next year at the earliest as very likely to be challenged in court, leading to a stampede before then).
Our economic prospects have got so good we want to stop you taking your money out… it’s that thing isn’t it with capital instead of labour. Communist societies have walls to keep people in, capitalist ones have them, to keep people out.
The UK can kiss its wealth creators goodbye. The young and entrepreneurial minded will leave to start businesses elsewhere. They will catch a few people with money on their way out (although accounting tricks will be used to minimise the bill) and existing entrepreneurs will re-base elsewhere for their next venture.
We need to be encouraging wealth creators and entrepreneurs to come to the UK and make money, providing jobs and growing the economy. Instead we get 1000 boat people a day. Very few of which I imagine are wealth creators...
Immigrants tend to be those who get up off their arses rather than staying put. I'd be very surprised if they weren't more entrepreneurial on average than those who sit on their sofas and moan about the state of the world
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
Worth looking at the hgv blindspots on the TFL direct vision standard website. Huge blindspots directly in front and to the sides of HGVs with high driver positions. I get quite nervous if an HGV gets too close as I'm pretty certain that some fatalities were because the driver got so close that they couldn't see the vulnerable road user in front of them.
As I've said passim: I would have every learner driver sit in the cab of an HGV (probably simulator) and see how much vision they do, and do not, have. It might be good to extend that to cyclists as well...
That's why you have ASL for cyclists, and why suggesting this cyclist put herself in a vulnerable position by using the ASL is so unfair, IMO.
The point of the ASL is to mitigate the visibility problems you can have from large vehicles. The driver intruded into it and the mitigation was undermined.
I've started reporting lorry drivers who do the same to the Police Scotland on this basis.
On that one the issue is that the lorry driver who killed the 22 year old woman had assumed it was OK for him to drive over the Advanced Stop Line into the cycle box because he knew there was essentially zero chance of him being held to account for breaking the rules of the road.
The correct place for him to stop, and the only place where it was fairly safe for him to do so, was where he could still see the Advanced Line through his windscreen, so he could see that the entire cycle box was empty. It's still not 100%, and he still needs to lean forward and look before he starts to move.
Also the same for the bus in the next lane that was right over the cycle box up to the lights.
I think the locals will be fine for the Tories, but it's spot-on to say the party absolutely loves pissing contests, factionalism and votes of no confidence - rather than thinking and pulling together - so, sadly, I think this is very likely.
I hold out little hope.
The 2025 elections are the county elections from 2021 where Covid ensured the Tories did very well. It's going to be bad for the Tories as they tend Lib Dem or Reform..
Boosted by the credibility of having a LibDem MP, in many cases the first in a century, I’d hope for some impressive LibDem results in the Home Counties.
The LDs already got 17% in the 2021 local elections and are polling less than that now. Labour are polling about the NEV they got in 2021 with the Tories down on then.
I would expect the biggest gainers on votes and seats in the county council elections next year to be Reform with them already on 20% with Opinium
Another post of yours to save….
Reminder to HYUFD that the Lib Dems always outperform Westminster polling at local elections.
If they’re on 13-14% in the polls I’d expect 18-19% in the locals.
Greens will do very well too. Labour will do calamatously, I think. Tories will perform reasonably well and Reform will underperform polling but consolidate in their heartlands.
Exactly. And he knows this - I had exactly the same argument with him on the run-up to the 2023 local elections, where he insisted that the LDs would crater because they were averaging only 10% in polls at the time.
Looking at the 2021 Local Elections, the average LD polling score in the month leading up to them was only 7.4%, with a maximum of 10% and a minimum of 5%
It would be interesting to see the stats. I assume the gap to polling is bigger when rural or suburban seats are up for election than when it’s an urban locals.
Because I looked back at my own posts arguing with him at the time, I happened to have them to hand (taken to 1 significant figure, and with 2023 and 2024 added on since then):
2024: Polling share 9%; LE vote share 17% 2023: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 20% 2022: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 19% 2021: Polling share 7%; LE vote share 17% 2020: Not available 2019: Polling share 9%; LE vote share 19% 2018: Polling share 8%; LE vote share 16% 2017: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 18% 2016: Polling share 7%; LE vote share 15%
So no pattern. Just a 10% or 8% bump every time (and never a 9% one…)
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
Worth looking at the hgv blindspots on the TFL direct vision standard website. Huge blindspots directly in front and to the sides of HGVs with high driver positions. I get quite nervous if an HGV gets too close as I'm pretty certain that some fatalities were because the driver got so close that they couldn't see the vulnerable road user in front of them.
Well, yes. That's an entirely routine way of killing cyclists.
As is being so close behind a cyclist that avoiding action is impossible to take if there is a pothole. A specialism of London bus drivers, I understand, who even now do not get much training (if any) about how to keep vulnerable road users safe.
On Friday I saw a pepparami-in-lycra (with tribars/aerobars, so a keen rider) do an absolutely dickhead overtake on a car that could have ended up very poorly for him, and would have if an oncoming driver had not braked. It was in a 20MPH zone, so hopefully would not have been too serious, but even so.
Incidentally, this was about a hundred metres down the road from where I saw a cyclist crash into the back of a bus last year. fortunately he was okay, but I hope he learnt not to draught too closely...
Now I'm racing a bit on my bike, I like looking at the mistakes other cyclists make so I can try to learn from them. In this case, don't try to overtake cars on bendy local roads when there is lots of traffic coming in the other direction; and especially, don't stray into the other lane...
That's the benefit of 20mph limits, I suppose. Mistakes like that don't end in fatalities.
Filtering through busy urban traffic is a refined art, particularly if there are large vehicles involved. You have to read each situation individually.
I always keep in mind the case of Emma Burke Newman in Glasgow, who filtered into the ASL (bike box) as advised in the HWC, but was killed by a lorry driver who intruded into the ASL and didn't notice her.
Worth looking at the hgv blindspots on the TFL direct vision standard website. Huge blindspots directly in front and to the sides of HGVs with high driver positions. I get quite nervous if an HGV gets too close as I'm pretty certain that some fatalities were because the driver got so close that they couldn't see the vulnerable road user in front of them.
Well, yes. That's an entirely routine way of killing cyclists.
As is being so close behind a cyclist that avoiding action is impossible to take if there is a pothole. A specialism of London bus drivers, I understand, who even now do not get much training (if any) about how to keep vulnerable road users safe.
It's what I call a fail-dangerous driving practice. It's a basic to always leave space for a cyclist to 'wobble', since that is how the vehicle works ... in a dynamic envelope. And on UK roads potholes are everywhere, so there may be one a vehicle behind cannot see.
It's another reason for never riding a cycle less than 1.2-1.5m from the kerb; and escape route is essential.
Classic circumstances are that the second driver climbing up the first driver's exhaust pipe at speed who can't see *anything* is the one who kills. Multiple cases.
(I think one here we all probably agree with this, subject to varied opinions on fact and degree.)
One good recent example was a student who fell off at very low speed on Edinburgh's Tram Tracks in a 20moh zone, but a tour bus was so close the driver could not stop or avoid.
A Road Policing Investigation Report found that while the driver of the minibus was within the 20mph speed limit and was aware of the cyclist’s presence, he had been closing in on her, and was therefore unable to take evasive action when she fell. https://road.cc/content/news/compensation-family-edinburgh-cyclist-275387
Comments
I get quite nervous if an HGV gets too close as I'm pretty certain that some fatalities were because the driver got so close that they couldn't see the vulnerable road user in front of them.
It might make TSE feel slightly less bad about Liverpool losing to us.
Slightly.
Surely the most universal, most sung, least controversial song in world history.
(Please now find an example of the happy birthday wars or a religious sect that considers it blasphemous, as must surely exist).
"Tory failings" is where your thinking starts, and stops.
Next.
My general view is that most cyclists are acutely aware of how vulnerable they are and so this idea that they need to be more defensive is a bit overwrought, and applies only to a few thrill seekers. Also deliveroo guys, who are desperately trying to make some money so have an explanation, if not excuse.
It's that vulnerability that makes people become better drivers - I'm certainly better at checking my mirrors now I've started cycling a bit more. Why I like the idea that cycling should be part of the driving test (or at least the HGV test).
Therefore they have an advantage. They can say and do anything they like, and can react much quicker than any law can. They allegedly advertise their services in various countries, and it is easy for them to make out that the UK is now an even easier touch now the Rwanda 'threat' has gone.
One change I'd do: ?Kirsty Alsop? recently got it in the neck from some (mostly on the left) for 'endangering' her child by letting her 15 year-old son go on a trip abroad alone. If that's endangerment, then any parent whose child dies on the crossing should be prosecuted for manslaughter.
It’s also possible there’s a counterfactual that given a few months longer the Rwanda deal would have acted as an effective deterrent, though unless it was scaled up to the tens of thousands it was always going to struggle, even ignoring the ethical ugliness of the policy.
The song is copyright. You need a performing rights license to sing it in public...
So yeah, that sort of the cyclist-is-never-wrong dickhead. They're a danger to themselves and other cyclists.
£22 billion investment into carbon capture. If the £22 billion number is problematic, as your post implies, don't use it. Your comms have already improved. In any case it's almost certainly a made up number. Talk about why you are doing it, who will be using it and how it eventually gets paid for - there's a big difference between investment and subsidy. The government used "investment" but people are interpreting it as subsidy. Maybe focus on the immediate projects in Teesside. Incidentally I just googled this "investment" and I'm none the wiser, which goes to show how woeful the comms actually is.
Winter Fuel Payments. This government will always aim to get the best value for taxpayers. It's not right that taxpayers struggling with the cost of living are providing handouts to pensioners with gold Rolex watches. We will instead focus the money on pensioners who need it.
The message is simple in this case. Thing is, they are not saying it.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53699511
That is simply factually untrue.
The point of the ASL is to mitigate the visibility problems you can have from large vehicles. The driver intruded into it and the mitigation was undermined.
I've started reporting lorry drivers who do the same to the Police Scotland on this basis.
Demand side policies like Rwanda seek to reduce the pull factors, and might have an effect, but in drug war terms they’re a bit like prison sentences for possession by end users.
The truth is that there is no detectable change in the number of small boat arrivals as a result of the change in government. Abandoning the Rwanda scheme has not made a jot of difference.
'One might, at a stretch, understand that the BBC would interview #Khamenei, the leader of #Iran. But to broadcast, as is, 45 min of a speech praising Oct 7 & advocating for the eradication of #Israel is nothing less than glorifying terrorism. Would you have, in 1939, servilely relayed Hitler's words?'
Garry Kasparov:
Inexcusable. Best response I saw, "The BBC used to be the Mecca of journalism. Now it's just Mecca."
At some point all those clever enlightened liberals are going to have to accept that criticism of auntie how goes beyond the Tories and Reform.
Crossings 5 July to 5 Sept 2024: 13,038
That’s including the last 2 bumper days on the 4th and 5th. We were running a grand further behind before then.
Up to the 4th July 2024 was comfortably ahead of 2023.
The point is, and I really don’t know why I keep bothering, the narrative that crossings have soared under Starmer is just bollocks.
I don’t care whether it is in the rules or not. I don’t care about the impact on the polls.
Do you think it is *right* that the PM and other senior ministers should be accepting expensive gifts from an individual?
The trend is not your friend.
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-53699511
So what you're seeing here is the effect of his initiatives ameliorated by an increase the other way by Starmer taking the brakes off.
What I think it highlights is a deliberate tactic developing by the traffickers. Weekdays with zero crossings, even in calm weather (mid last week was pretty calm on the channel) then a big regatta, like a sort of reverse Dunkirk.
Past years have seen big numbers even into November and if the boats are larger now then sea conditions may play less of a part.
Looking at the 2021 Local Elections, the average LD polling score in the month leading up to them was only 7.4%, with a maximum of 10% and a minimum of 5%
Think of it like partnerships in a limited overs game.
The statistics show that this year is a bit worse than the last, and based on the gradient of the curve it looks like things are getting worse rather than improving.
Truly awful.
Being subjected to it when having a meal out is appalling.
Worse still, attending a birthday party and having to pretend to join in singing it.
Just play the Altered Images song, ffs.
- source region push in the previous year
- traffickers’ sophistication and tactics
- French and UK police effectiveness in countering these
It’s possible for example that you could see a sudden crash in numbers randomly because of some major gang war wiping out the ringleaders, and nobody would ever know. Or a sudden big surge because traffickers had got a big delivery of new boats theyd been waiting for.
But even allowing for that, and allowing for the fact that many things were wrong with the economy that were not their fault, the Sunak/Hunt performance was exceptional.
Reeves is left with bad options and worse ones. So far, she seems intent on doing the worse ones.
Re the original question, contemplate this horror from the Jehovah Witness website:
"Jehovah’s Witnesses do not celebrate birthdays because we believe that such celebrations displease God."
Full sad text here:
https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesses/faq/birthdays/
2024: Polling share 9%; LE vote share 17%
2023: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 20%
2022: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 19%
2021: Polling share 7%; LE vote share 17%
2020: Not available
2019: Polling share 9%; LE vote share 19%
2018: Polling share 8%; LE vote share 16%
2017: Polling share 10%; LE vote share 18%
2016: Polling share 7%; LE vote share 15%
Things slowed down a lot from Oct-Dec last year, unlike 2022. So that may explain Labour silence on the lower rates during the summer.
I am still stubbornly resisting turning the heating on.
Regarding whether things are getting worse, if you add the latest crossings onto the BBC chart, the gap between 2023 and 2024 will be worsening, not improving.
The French seem as inept at catching the Hereford Crew as they are the previous crop of traffickers. Word is "Hereford" have a boat division. They are letting far far few boats across - and demanding a twenty-fold increase in crossing fees. You REALLY have to want to cross.
Strangely, the British seem to know exactly where and when these crossings are going to happen. Most of the boats get met at the beach.
Freelancers up in Belgium have tried a new operation, to undercut Hereford. But have come to a similar messy end as their French counterparts.
Word is Hereford have done a deal with the local gendarmes to "do a Nelson". Anyway, crossings are massively down, but the local cops seem happy enough in their shiny new cars.
NEW THREAD
Meanwhile we continue to import people who are a drain on the country's coffers while giving productive contributors every possible encouragement to leave.
And if she doesn't wallop taxes up after all her hard talk, she will be seen as a lame duck.
Her own rules have tied her hands behind her back. Reverting the 2% NI cut alone would solve most of her problems but income tax, NI and VAT changes have already been ruled out.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/22/442694777/happy-birthday-to-us-all-judge-rules-tune-is-public-domain
The correct place for him to stop, and the only place where it was fairly safe for him to do so, was where he could still see the Advanced Line through his windscreen, so he could see that the entire cycle box was empty. It's still not 100%, and he still needs to lean forward and look before he starts to move.
Also the same for the bus in the next lane that was right over the cycle box up to the lights.
As is being so close behind a cyclist that avoiding action is impossible to take if there is a pothole. A specialism of London bus drivers, I understand, who even now do not get much training (if any) about how to keep vulnerable road users safe.
As is being so close behind a cyclist that avoiding action is impossible to take if there is a pothole. A specialism of London bus drivers, I understand, who even now do not get much training (if any) about how to keep vulnerable road users safe.
It's what I call a fail-dangerous driving practice. It's a basic to always leave space for a cyclist to 'wobble', since that is how the vehicle works ... in a dynamic envelope. And on UK roads potholes are everywhere, so there may be one a vehicle behind cannot see.
It's another reason for never riding a cycle less than 1.2-1.5m from the kerb; and escape route is essential.
Classic circumstances are that the second driver climbing up the first driver's exhaust pipe at speed who can't see *anything* is the one who kills. Multiple cases.
(I think one here we all probably agree with this, subject to varied opinions on fact and degree.)
One good recent example was a student who fell off at very low speed on Edinburgh's Tram Tracks in a 20moh zone, but a tour bus was so close the driver could not stop or avoid.
A Road Policing Investigation Report found that while the driver of the minibus was within the 20mph speed limit and was aware of the cyclist’s presence, he had been closing in on her, and was therefore unable to take evasive action when she fell.
https://road.cc/content/news/compensation-family-edinburgh-cyclist-275387