So Starmer's deportations aren't what any traditional use of the English language would describe as deportations?
We're paying a tiny, tiny percentage of illegal immigrants to go home to safe countries
And Starmer claims that he's deported loads of illegals
He sent a plane loads of Vietnamese back to Saigon over the summer. One moment you're moaning that the current government has failed in its immigration policy the next you are changing the terms of reference to suit your agenda.
You have plenty of genuine targets to aim at over Starmer's 5 months of disappointment but immigration after years of your team's subject failure is a bit rich.
Where are the human rights lawyers challenging every deportation that happened under the previous government?
Why didn't the last government go after these apparently easy targets that have been found so quickly for human rights lawyer Sir Keir?
Is Sir Keir such a fucking amazing human rights lawyer that he just knows, and wins?
It is not that SKS is amazing. It is that the Conservatives were a mix of incompetents and two faced liars quite happy to fail in tackling asylum in order to generate favourable Daily Mail headlines. It really is beyond time to start asking why voters concerned about immigration don't understand this. Some have and have switched to Reform. More will as time goes by.
If you don't warehouse thousands of asylum seekers in socially deprived areas then there are no asylum seekers to get angry about.... Reform need an immigration problem to be electorally successful, so they aren't going to solve it, and since the Conservatives let Crosby take charge of their electoral strategy that's been their tactic as well.
The Managerial skills of SKS. Getting flights off the ground at 3k per head to remove almost 10000 people in 4 months.
Contrast and compare to 700m for 4 volunteers to Rwanda at 175million a head
Who'd have thought it was so simple.
If he can upscale that 3 fold per annum just imagine the last breath seeping out of the Reform bubble in 4 years time.
It's not rocket science it's method and process driven commonsense.
The morality of SKS.
Straight for the low hanging fruit - women and young children shipped to Brazil on Secret Flights, back to where the street gangs said they would murder them if they ever saw them again.
Have you any idea what happens the other end, She Corn? Frightened Women and children dumped on a tarmac whilst SKS secret extradition flights roar off into distance for the next pay load.
Are you suggesting that we should give them asylum instead?
Personally I am not convinced that Deliverism is going to win Labour another term, but I see it in my workplace too, with a strong emphasis on unblocking productivity from our SMT.
I was somewhat surprised that I was in the demographic which voted Labour more than any other I did vote for them for the first time, but I just naturally assumed the very young would do so even more.
More worrying than that is the clearly apparent wave of early onset dementia that is going to cripple us (well your generation) financially for the next 3 decades.
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Once these become enacted, no sane party is going to propose reversing them.
Of course they are, they are both disastrous, awful, vindictive policies.
Many of the LDs voters now are pensioners and farmers, they will rightly demand Starmer drops them as will every other opposition party or he can forget any confidence and supply deal if he loses his majority
I'm an LD voter and member, but if they campaign on a ticket of reversing these taxes I'll be voting Labour.
Good, bye then. The LDs are well rid of you if you back the awful tractor tax and despicable WFA cut
Only shocking thing is that he didn't make the jump a decade ago.
He used to have an office at CCHQ when he ran the Conservative Christian Fellowship, he will certainly try and shift Reform in a more socially conservative direction. He joins Ann Widdecombe as the main representative of the Christian right in Reform
Proving the old adage.
Tim Montgomerie has abandoned the Tories for Reform and as a result the quality of both parties has gone up.
That's rather clever Bart. Although one's head hurts after thinking about it.
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Ken Clark on LBC suggested that the IHT on farms is fine. He criticised the Thatcher Tories for implementing it. He also said he would remove WFP which he claimed was a last ditch Gordon throw of the dice. Both taxes he explains have been poorly sold by Reeves. He disagrees with the employers NI policy. He said her error was promising not to increase income tax and VAT. He says he would have jacked up VAT and to Hell with the popularity consequences.
Ken Clarke is too leftwing even for the LDs these days, he belongs in Starmer Labour
Good summary by Ken Clarke and you do insult him if you think he would join labour
Well given he was anti Brexit and is pro tractor tax and pro WFA cut there isn't much he disagrees with Starmer on
Of course there is and not least the growth and job destroying Reeves budget
He just said he agreed with most of Reeves' budget
The central plank of Reeves budget was rejected by Clarke
No it wasn't, he backed the tractor tax and WFA cut
The NI was the central plank of the budget and why businesses are struggling with it, not WFA or tractor tax which do not effect businesses
I was somewhat surprised that I was in the demographic which voted Labour more than any other I did vote for them for the first time, but I just naturally assumed the very young would do so even more.
More worrying than that is the clearly apparent wave of early onset dementia that is going to cripple us (well your generation) financially for the next 3 decades.
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Once these become enacted, no sane party is going to propose reversing them.
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Once these become enacted, no sane party is going to propose reversing them.
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Once these become enacted, no sane party is going to propose reversing them.
Of course they are, they are both disastrous, awful, vindictive policies.
Many of the LDs voters now are pensioners and farmers, they will rightly demand Starmer drops them as will every other opposition party or he can forget any confidence and supply deal if he loses his majority
You are talking 4 years away and nobody, even you, knows which topics will feature then
"A 'really positive' example: Reform's deputy leader defends MP convicted of assaulting girlfriend Finally with Reform UK's deputy leader, Richard Tice, we ask about his party colleague James McMurdock.
It's emerged he was jailed when he was 19 for repeatedly kicking his girlfriend, having not disclosed the conviction before he was elected.
'Gone full circle'
Mr Tice defends his colleague, saying: "We are a great Christian nation. Are you seriously saying that if someone makes a bad mistake in life, age 19, that there's no redemption they are doomed as a sinner forever?
"The whole point of Christianity is a sense of - if you've done something wrong, you pay your price. And at the end of that sentence, whatever it is, then, in a sense you've done your bit, you served your punishment."
He goes on to say it is "remarkable" that Mr McMurdock has "gone full circle" and done well in life after his punishment."
Tice is right in my view. McMurdock served his time and there is no bar to him remaining the MP he was elected to be. Let voters judge if they wish to re elect him next time, they may well do given even the President elect of the USA is a former convicted criminal
Two wrongs do not make a right and Tice defending someone who allegedly kicked his girlfriend is simply unacceptable
Point of order. It wasn't 'allegedly'. He was convicted and jailed.
"A 'really positive' example: Reform's deputy leader defends MP convicted of assaulting girlfriend Finally with Reform UK's deputy leader, Richard Tice, we ask about his party colleague James McMurdock.
It's emerged he was jailed when he was 19 for repeatedly kicking his girlfriend, having not disclosed the conviction before he was elected.
'Gone full circle'
Mr Tice defends his colleague, saying: "We are a great Christian nation. Are you seriously saying that if someone makes a bad mistake in life, age 19, that there's no redemption they are doomed as a sinner forever?
"The whole point of Christianity is a sense of - if you've done something wrong, you pay your price. And at the end of that sentence, whatever it is, then, in a sense you've done your bit, you served your punishment."
He goes on to say it is "remarkable" that Mr McMurdock has "gone full circle" and done well in life after his punishment."
Tice is right in my view. McMurdock served his time and there is no bar to him remaining the MP he was elected to be. Let voters judge if they wish to re elect him next time, they may well do given even the President elect of the USA is a former convicted criminal
Two wrongs do not make a right and Tice defending someone who allegedly kicked his girlfriend is simply unacceptable
Point of order. It wasn't 'allegedly'. He was convicted and jailed.
I was just being careful but thank you for the clarification
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Once these become enacted, no sane party is going to propose reversing them.
Of course they are, they are both disastrous, awful, vindictive policies.
Many of the LDs voters now are pensioners and farmers, they will rightly demand Starmer drops them as will every other opposition party or he can forget any confidence and supply deal if he loses his majority
I'm an LD voter and member, but if they campaign on a ticket of reversing these taxes I'll be voting Labour.
I'm not an LD voter, but I agree. It feels rather as if the LDs are currently jumping on any anti-government bandwagon that seems popular regardless of the merits of the case. Rather disappointing.
Only shocking thing is that he didn't make the jump a decade ago.
He used to have an office at CCHQ when he ran the Conservative Christian Fellowship, he will certainly try and shift Reform in a more socially conservative direction. He joins Ann Widdecombe as the main representative of the Christian right in Reform
Proving the old adage.
Tim Montgomerie has abandoned the Tories for Reform and as a result the quality of both parties has gone up.
That's rather clever Bart. Although one's head hurts after thinking about it.
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Ken Clark on LBC suggested that the IHT on farms is fine. He criticised the Thatcher Tories for implementing it. He also said he would remove WFP which he claimed was a last ditch Gordon throw of the dice. Both taxes he explains have been poorly sold by Reeves. He disagrees with the employers NI policy. He said her error was promising not to increase income tax and VAT. He says he would have jacked up VAT and to Hell with the popularity consequences.
Ken Clarke is too leftwing even for the LDs these days, he belongs in Starmer Labour
Good summary by Ken Clarke and you do insult him if you think he would join labour
Well given he was anti Brexit and is pro tractor tax and pro WFA cut there isn't much he disagrees with Starmer on
Of course there is and not least the growth and job destroying Reeves budget
He just said he agreed with most of Reeves' budget
The central plank of Reeves budget was rejected by Clarke
No it wasn't, he backed the tractor tax and WFA cut
The NI was the central plank of the budget and why businesses are struggling with it, not WFA or tractor tax which do not effect businesses
Farms are businesses and pensioners are a huge voting block
This website is at its best when we have people across the spectrum so it’s good to have a genuine Starmer supporter here other than myself.
I’d hope we can also get some Badenoch supporters in time.
Some would prefer a right wing or left wing echo chamber. I come here specifically to avoid that, so please let’s hope it continues as is.
Most people on here seem to have already forgotten about Badenoch.
Not me and I am content to give her time
She is young and very different and nobody knows just how she will evolve over time
The choice at the next GE is already set up to be a Tory and Reform government (whether Badenoch or Farage ended up PM would depend on which of them won most seats) or a Starmer government propped up by the LDs.
Starmer and his government's popularity has plunged so far the chances of another Labour majority are very slim
Only shocking thing is that he didn't make the jump a decade ago.
He used to have an office at CCHQ when he ran the Conservative Christian Fellowship, he will certainly try and shift Reform in a more socially conservative direction. He joins Ann Widdecombe as the main representative of the Christian right in Reform
Proving the old adage.
Tim Montgomerie has abandoned the Tories for Reform and as a result the quality of both parties has gone up.
That's rather clever Bart. Although one's head hurts after thinking about it.
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Ken Clark on LBC suggested that the IHT on farms is fine. He criticised the Thatcher Tories for implementing it. He also said he would remove WFP which he claimed was a last ditch Gordon throw of the dice. Both taxes he explains have been poorly sold by Reeves. He disagrees with the employers NI policy. He said her error was promising not to increase income tax and VAT. He says he would have jacked up VAT and to Hell with the popularity consequences.
Ken Clarke is too leftwing even for the LDs these days, he belongs in Starmer Labour
Good summary by Ken Clarke and you do insult him if you think he would join labour
Well given he was anti Brexit and is pro tractor tax and pro WFA cut there isn't much he disagrees with Starmer on
Of course there is and not least the growth and job destroying Reeves budget
He just said he agreed with most of Reeves' budget
The central plank of Reeves budget was rejected by Clarke
No it wasn't, he backed the tractor tax and WFA cut
The NI was the central plank of the budget and why businesses are struggling with it, not WFA or tractor tax which do not effect businesses
Farms are businesses and pensioners are a huge voting block
It still doesn't alter the central objection Clarke had to the NI rise
This website is at its best when we have people across the spectrum so it’s good to have a genuine Starmer supporter here other than myself.
I’d hope we can also get some Badenoch supporters in time.
Some would prefer a right wing or left wing echo chamber. I come here specifically to avoid that, so please let’s hope it continues as is.
Most people on here seem to have already forgotten about Badenoch.
Not me and I am content to give her time
She is young and very different and nobody knows just how she will evolve over time
Badenochs critics are having fun by saying she is coming across as young and inexperienced, whilst simultaneously attacking her for being in senior positions in governments! It’s a bit of a double whammy, like Kamala Harris was caught in no man’s land between running against the administration she was in, or double down by standing by its policies.
But I agree with you, the future depends on what sort of unique and niche position Badenoch’s leadership comes to be known for over time. Will the clear blue water positions she carves out between her and Starmer’s Labour be popular with the public, or will it frighten them off?
The Reform/Conservative future government seems unlikely when so many Con MPs in last government would probably troop through the voting lobbies with anyone rather than Farage..the Con members on the other hand...🤔😏
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
You said "when the wind isn't blowing". Building and maintaining wind turbines isn't cheap.
Ummm: I thought you were talking about natural gas?
Irrespective, what does the cost of building have to do with anything? If the guy who built the wind turbines doesn't make his cost of capital or goes bust, then the wind turbines still exist, and still generate power.
There are many power plants in the UK that went bust at one point or another, usually due to over-leverage, and then got picked up for pennies on the dollar.
I was talking about everything else in the context of your panglossian view of solar.
The lifespan of a turbine is only about 20-25 years. If they're an essential part of the mix despite solar, then how will the economics stack up if the price of electricity becomes "spectacularly cheap"?
Oh, in the long run, wind doesn't make sense either. I wouldn't be queuing up to invest in wind turbines today.
But here's the chart:
That's solar price per watt over time. Basically, it's dropped by 20% every year. (Wind by contrast has improved by maybe 2%.)
A bet against solar is a bet that that 20% stops. And it might. But you'd be a brave man betting against it.
Should the likes of Spain, Portugal not be building huge wind farms with interconnectors to the rest of Europe?
Build 500%+ of their own electricity needs and become huge energy exporters.
You mean solar?
And yes, they should.
Which implies you don't think domestic solar can be sufficient, otherwise the transport costs wouldn't be worth it.
Not necessarily.
In the long term, solar panels will be so cheap that we'll cover the UK in them.
But in the medium term, panels in North Africa and the Iberian peninsular make perfect sense. And they'll keep being useful even after the UK is covered in panels, because daylight hours are so much longer in winter there.
The issue with solar is that while California's electricity demand spikes in the summer when the sun is shining and the air con is going on, the UK's demands spike in winter when it is dark 16 hours of a day and the heating is on.
Solar absolutely is great at marginal costs when it works, but I don't see it as being as reliable as eg wind etc personally.
Three or four years I would have agreed with you. However now the cost of batteries (sometimes living inside an EV) is plummeting.
We’ve not yet got a battery, but I know plenty of smug MC families bragging about their low or even zero electricity bills.
Give it a few years and this will be widespread. Doesn’t help the buggers living in tenements though
Though there are setups like this that can produce a bit under a kilowatt;
The cheaper the technology gets (and there's no reason why the price shouldn't fall some more), the more marginal applications become sensible.
For now, at least, it's not solar or wind, both of them can tap decent amounts of energy at a good price.
Got to say the only reason I haven’t got home batteries is that I can’t make the maths work once the electrician adds his costs. I find paying £1500 for a couple of hours work (which it is when I compare their prices to what I can get buy the batteries for) rather annoying.
And I suspect there isn’t much further price reductions on the batteries
The Reform/Conservative future government seems unlikely when so many Con MPs in last government would probably troop through the voting lobbies with anyone rather than Farage..the Con members on the other hand...🤔😏
Well they aren't going to troop through the lobbies with Labour are they unless they want to risk being deselected by their associations. There is also next to no chance of the LDs doing any deal with the Tories post Brexit for a generation, so Reform it will have to be given the Tories are still nowhere near majority winning level even with Labour's collapsing popularity
This website is at its best when we have people across the spectrum so it’s good to have a genuine Starmer supporter here other than myself.
I’d hope we can also get some Badenoch supporters in time.
Some would prefer a right wing or left wing echo chamber. I come here specifically to avoid that, so please let’s hope it continues as is.
Most people on here seem to have already forgotten about Badenoch.
Not me and I am content to give her time
She is young and very different and nobody knows just how she will evolve over time
The choice at the next GE is already set up to be a Tory and Reform government (whether Badenoch or Farage ended up PM would depend on which of them won most seats) or a Starmer government propped up by the LDs.
Starmer and his government's popularity has plunged so far the chances of another Labour majority are very slim
Far too early to be sure of that. If Labour deliver on income renewal, people go into polling on Thursday May 3rd 2029 feeling financially a lot better off than at the last election day, Starmer’s Labour will get another landslide win, as that will trump absolutely everything else on the day. Though some of the other metrics, like NHS, asylum application processing and boat crossings, economic growth, house building, sewage spills, could be seen as successful turnarounds on the next GE day too.
Would you say Black Wednesday and mortgage rates played a big part in the 1997 election making Tories unpopular, and at the same time say much lower mortgage rates in May 29 compared July 24 won’t help Labour popularity one bit?
I know - I posted that earlier. But the outcome could have been very different, with some relatively small changes in circumstances.
Right here is one example of how it might have gone down differently.
A soldier apparently pointed a gun at an opposition party spokesperson. President Yoon must stop pretending to be a defender of democracy. I'll never forget what happened today. https://x.com/yejinjgim/status/1864065443528351892
This website is at its best when we have people across the spectrum so it’s good to have a genuine Starmer supporter here other than myself.
I’d hope we can also get some Badenoch supporters in time.
Some would prefer a right wing or left wing echo chamber. I come here specifically to avoid that, so please let’s hope it continues as is.
Most people on here seem to have already forgotten about Badenoch.
Not me and I am content to give her time
She is young and very different and nobody knows just how she will evolve over time
The choice at the next GE is already set up to be a Tory and Reform government (whether Badenoch or Farage ended up PM would depend on which of them won most seats) or a Starmer government propped up by the LDs.
Starmer and his government's popularity has plunged so far the chances of another Labour majority are very slim
Far too early to be sure of that. If Labour deliver on income renewal, people go into polling on Thursday May 3rd 2029 feeling financially a lot better off than at the last election day, Starmer’s Labour will get another landslide win, as that will trump absolutely everything else on the day. Though some of the other metrics, like NHS, asylum application processing and boat crossings, economic growth, house building, sewage spills, could be seen as successful turnarounds on the next GE day too.
Would you say Black Wednesday and mortgage rates played a big part in the 1997 election making Tories unpopular, and at the same time say much lower mortgage rates in May 29 compared July 24 won’t help Labour popularity one bit?
Income renewal? How? This tax rising government is already hitting growth, unemployment is rising again, inflation which Rishi was getting a grip on back up too. Not to mention its complete inability to control the boats.
Nope, Labour is near done already, its best hope is scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs.
If Farage eats further into the white working class Labour vote however Labour is done and he could even enter government in a deal with Badenoch who has made some gains on the latest polls with middle class voters who voted Labour in July
After.enjoying the initial relief from the Twitter sewer, I'm finding Bluesky beginning to grate a little. There tends to be somewhat of a surfeit of self-important young students who believe they've got eveything sussed.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
You said "when the wind isn't blowing". Building and maintaining wind turbines isn't cheap.
Ummm: I thought you were talking about natural gas?
Irrespective, what does the cost of building have to do with anything? If the guy who built the wind turbines doesn't make his cost of capital or goes bust, then the wind turbines still exist, and still generate power.
There are many power plants in the UK that went bust at one point or another, usually due to over-leverage, and then got picked up for pennies on the dollar.
I was talking about everything else in the context of your panglossian view of solar.
The lifespan of a turbine is only about 20-25 years. If they're an essential part of the mix despite solar, then how will the economics stack up if the price of electricity becomes "spectacularly cheap"?
Oh, in the long run, wind doesn't make sense either. I wouldn't be queuing up to invest in wind turbines today.
But here's the chart:
That's solar price per watt over time. Basically, it's dropped by 20% every year. (Wind by contrast has improved by maybe 2%.)
A bet against solar is a bet that that 20% stops. And it might. But you'd be a brave man betting against it.
Should the likes of Spain, Portugal not be building huge wind farms with interconnectors to the rest of Europe?
Build 500%+ of their own electricity needs and become huge energy exporters.
Export to whom?
I can see bits at the margins - 10, 15% of consumption.
I can't see 1200-1300 GWh being in demand per annum.
We currently import huge amounts of gas and oil from questionable countries.
Why would we (and Germany etc) not import green electricity from close allies if falling solar panel prices make cheap energy from it abundant and cheaper than fossil fuels? Especially as more of our energy usage comes from electricity rather than oil over time.
Land is more scarce in the UK for large solar panel farms, and clearly we have less sun.
OK. The argument is weak on a number of fronts.
1 - The number mentioned was 500% of Spanish consumption. That is the same as electricity used by perhaps France, UK, Italy and most of Germany (ballpark). That claim is overegged.
2 - Spain has more insolation than the UK, but it's not *that* much more. Maybe 40% more (1500 kWh/sqm, vs 1000-1100 for England over a year). Seasonal profiles are similar, so they can't do much for us in winter; they will need it themselves as output will fall by 80-90% over summer. That needs wind or other, or inter-seasonal storage - which was a 1990s dream now largely found wanting.
Spanish solar just does not address our core seasonal need profile.
3 - Winter is wind, tidal (if the dream can be scaled up) or other.
4 - We won't want to be more dependent on any country. We knew that was a bad idea, and Ukraine-Russia has driven it home - even more so eg for Germany-Italy than us. We are also getting a rapid lesson in long undersea cables, though just the first week of WW1 should have taught us that.
No country will now want to import a large % of their power, and will want generation distributed for security reasons.
5 - Main electricity export country for the next decades in Western Europe is likely to be France, as it has been for the last generation.
6 - We already have resilience connections in place for ~15% of our electricity demand in place, with more coming on stream.
7 - We have hundreds of square km of roofs that we have not even touched yet. Even in domestic solar, we have installs on only 3-5% or so of suitable house roofs. Plus mixed ag-solar farming methods are developing.
8 - If the marginal cost is very little, then we can just as easily put it here for security and transmission cost reasons.
9 - It remains that reducing usage is way ahead of building more power generation as a solution. And we have a huge way to go on that, too - even though we have come a long way. Just doing a new build house properly reduces heat energy demand by 80-90%, or 50-70% for a renovation over a poorly insulated one.
After.enjoying the initial relief from the Twitter sewer, I'm finding Bluesky beginning to grate a little. There tends to be somewhat of a surfeit of self-important young students who believe they've got eveything sussed.
After.enjoying the initial relief from the Twitter sewer, I'm finding Bluesky beginning to grate a little. There tends to be somewhat of a surfeit of self-important young students who believe they've got eveything sussed.
Just like us 20-50 years ago, then !
Indeed.
Bluesky seems to be the place to be if a young American student who believes oneself to be immensely sophisticated, but in fact often shows signs of a very binary view if things, and Twitter is the place to be if you're a Trumpist mad loon.
"A 'really positive' example: Reform's deputy leader defends MP convicted of assaulting girlfriend Finally with Reform UK's deputy leader, Richard Tice, we ask about his party colleague James McMurdock.
It's emerged he was jailed when he was 19 for repeatedly kicking his girlfriend, having not disclosed the conviction before he was elected.
'Gone full circle'
Mr Tice defends his colleague, saying: "We are a great Christian nation. Are you seriously saying that if someone makes a bad mistake in life, age 19, that there's no redemption they are doomed as a sinner forever?
"The whole point of Christianity is a sense of - if you've done something wrong, you pay your price. And at the end of that sentence, whatever it is, then, in a sense you've done your bit, you served your punishment."
He goes on to say it is "remarkable" that Mr McMurdock has "gone full circle" and done well in life after his punishment."
Tice is right in my view. McMurdock served his time and there is no bar to him remaining the MP he was elected to be. Let voters judge if they wish to re elect him next time, they may well do given even the President elect of the USA is a former convicted criminal
Two wrongs do not make a right and Tice defending someone who allegedly kicked his girlfriend is simply unacceptable
This was many years ago and he served his time for it and it is long since a spent conviction
In todays society you cannot defend physical abuse of a female no matter how long ago
That is up to the voters of Basildon and S Thurrock to decide next time, if McMurdock is re elected they will have decided even that abuse can be forgiven if he has served his time and not done it again
You and Jesus might forgive the repenting sinner but I wouldn't. He has no business being an MP for what he did.
Only shocking thing is that he didn't make the jump a decade ago.
He used to have an office at CCHQ when he ran the Conservative Christian Fellowship, he will certainly try and shift Reform in a more socially conservative direction. He joins Ann Widdecombe as the main representative of the Christian right in Reform
Proving the old adage.
Tim Montgomerie has abandoned the Tories for Reform and as a result the quality of both parties has gone up.
That's rather clever Bart. Although one's head hurts after thinking about it.
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Ken Clark on LBC suggested that the IHT on farms is fine. He criticised the Thatcher Tories for implementing it. He also said he would remove WFP which he claimed was a last ditch Gordon throw of the dice. Both taxes he explains have been poorly sold by Reeves. He disagrees with the employers NI policy. He said her error was promising not to increase income tax and VAT. He says he would have jacked up VAT and to Hell with the popularity consequences.
Ken Clarke is too leftwing even for the LDs these days, he belongs in Starmer Labour
Labour embracing the scourge of public sector workers in his day would be like the Democrats embracing Bush and Cheney.
Labour haven't embraced him and he was critical of Reeves. As far as I am aware he remains a Tory Peer, unless you know to the contrary.
"A 'really positive' example: Reform's deputy leader defends MP convicted of assaulting girlfriend Finally with Reform UK's deputy leader, Richard Tice, we ask about his party colleague James McMurdock.
It's emerged he was jailed when he was 19 for repeatedly kicking his girlfriend, having not disclosed the conviction before he was elected.
'Gone full circle'
Mr Tice defends his colleague, saying: "We are a great Christian nation. Are you seriously saying that if someone makes a bad mistake in life, age 19, that there's no redemption they are doomed as a sinner forever?
"The whole point of Christianity is a sense of - if you've done something wrong, you pay your price. And at the end of that sentence, whatever it is, then, in a sense you've done your bit, you served your punishment."
He goes on to say it is "remarkable" that Mr McMurdock has "gone full circle" and done well in life after his punishment."
Tice is right in my view. McMurdock served his time and there is no bar to him remaining the MP he was elected to be. Let voters judge if they wish to re elect him next time, they may well do given even the President elect of the USA is a former convicted criminal
Two wrongs do not make a right and Tice defending someone who allegedly kicked his girlfriend is simply unacceptable
To me it doesn't quite hang together from Tice. He is not consistent - a problem with populism. What I have sounds to me like a response to prominent current reporting in the tabloids, rather than a thought-through policy.
The Reform Election Manifesto said:
"Commence Zero Tolerance Policing Clampdown on all crime and antisocial behaviour. Increase Stop and Search substantially. Prison for violent crimes and possessing a knife. Drug dealing and trafficking will get mandatory life imprisonment. A new offence of Substantial Possession of Drugs will meet heavy fines."
Add in immediate deportation of foreign criminals (who do not seem to benefit from his Christian forgiveness) and the inconsistency is clear.
I'm not sure what he has said about the Govt's emphasis on rehabilitation, and I would like to hear more from him on that so I can evaluate his argued case better.
After.enjoying the initial relief from the Twitter sewer, I'm finding Bluesky beginning to grate a little. There tends to be somewhat of a surfeit of self-important young students who believe they've got eveything sussed.
Can't say I'm surprised by this description of the site.
Lefty Mark Steel wrote this a few days ago.
"But Bluesky’s selling point is that everyone on there is lovely and liberal, so it’s almost TOO full of kindness. I joined it this week and immediately people sent messages such as, “SO pleased you’ve joined us here in this heartwarming community of empathy. Wishing you love and warmth and hope your aural centres are fully aligned.” I think it needs some Trump supporters to make it seem a bit more wholesome."
This website is at its best when we have people across the spectrum so it’s good to have a genuine Starmer supporter here other than myself.
I’d hope we can also get some Badenoch supporters in time.
Some would prefer a right wing or left wing echo chamber. I come here specifically to avoid that, so please let’s hope it continues as is.
Most people on here seem to have already forgotten about Badenoch.
Not me and I am content to give her time
She is young and very different and nobody knows just how she will evolve over time
The choice at the next GE is already set up to be a Tory and Reform government (whether Badenoch or Farage ended up PM would depend on which of them won most seats) or a Starmer government propped up by the LDs.
Starmer and his government's popularity has plunged so far the chances of another Labour majority are very slim
Far too early to be sure of that. If Labour deliver on income renewal, people go into polling on Thursday May 3rd 2029 feeling financially a lot better off than at the last election day, Starmer’s Labour will get another landslide win, as that will trump absolutely everything else on the day. Though some of the other metrics, like NHS, asylum application processing and boat crossings, economic growth, house building, sewage spills, could be seen as successful turnarounds on the next GE day too.
Would you say Black Wednesday and mortgage rates played a big part in the 1997 election making Tories unpopular, and at the same time say much lower mortgage rates in May 29 compared July 24 won’t help Labour popularity one bit?
Income renewal? How? This tax rising government is already hitting growth, unemployment is rising again, inflation which Rishi was getting a grip on back up too. Not to mention its complete inability to control the boats.
Nope, Labour is near done already, its best hope is scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs.
If Farage eats further into the white working class Labour vote however Labour is done and he could even enter government in a deal with Badenoch who has made some gains on the latest polls with middle class voters who voted Labour in July
I suspect you remain unaware of how reviled the Conservative Party remains despite your extrapolations from sub-samples. I'll refer to Clark again. He said that whoever won the election would become unpopular quickly because of the choices they had to make. The lady Government has left a mess. He said that as far as he is concerned employers NI was a poor means to raising tax, as I said earlier bhe would have gone straight for VAT ( a regressive tax, favoured by Tory Chancellors).
I see Farage and Tice not the Tories taking voters from Labour should they fail to rally in the next four years and you won't get a look in. Your party has lost their press, that should worry you.
"Tokyo Metro wins contract to operate London’s Elizabeth line Consortium including company that runs Tokyo’s renowned metro system to take over from China’s MTR in May"
This website is at its best when we have people across the spectrum so it’s good to have a genuine Starmer supporter here other than myself.
I’d hope we can also get some Badenoch supporters in time.
Some would prefer a right wing or left wing echo chamber. I come here specifically to avoid that, so please let’s hope it continues as is.
Most people on here seem to have already forgotten about Badenoch.
Not me and I am content to give her time
She is young and very different and nobody knows just how she will evolve over time
The choice at the next GE is already set up to be a Tory and Reform government (whether Badenoch or Farage ended up PM would depend on which of them won most seats) or a Starmer government propped up by the LDs.
Starmer and his government's popularity has plunged so far the chances of another Labour majority are very slim
Far too early to be sure of that. If Labour deliver on income renewal, people go into polling on Thursday May 3rd 2029 feeling financially a lot better off than at the last election day, Starmer’s Labour will get another landslide win, as that will trump absolutely everything else on the day. Though some of the other metrics, like NHS, asylum application processing and boat crossings, economic growth, house building, sewage spills, could be seen as successful turnarounds on the next GE day too.
Would you say Black Wednesday and mortgage rates played a big part in the 1997 election making Tories unpopular, and at the same time say much lower mortgage rates in May 29 compared July 24 won’t help Labour popularity one bit?
Income renewal? How? This tax rising government is already hitting growth, unemployment is rising again, inflation which Rishi was getting a grip on back up too. Not to mention its complete inability to control the boats.
Nope, Labour is near done already, its best hope is scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs.
If Farage eats further into the white working class Labour vote however Labour is done and he could even enter government in a deal with Badenoch who has made some gains on the latest polls with middle class voters who voted Labour in July
It’s coming across a bit weird that you not accepting the actual situation.
“Income renewal? How? This tax rising government is already hitting growth, unemployment is rising again, inflation which Rishi was getting a grip on back up too. Not to mention its complete inability to control the boats. Nope, Labour is near done already”.
There was always going to be a big tax raising and public service spending budget whoever won the election. Inflation was always going to be back up this winter because of its link to energy price rises, regardless who won the election. The fact they didn’t go big for growth and income renewal straight away, letting more inflation out the bag, is to their credit. Early days on their policies for controlling the boats, though they are getting some surprisingly quick success on processing the Conservatives just couldn’t manage.
Are you seriously trying to convince me, May 3rd 2029, all that voters will remember is this autumns boat crossings and budget, not anything and everything between now and then? 🤦♀️
They have complete control of the machinery for nearly five years, at least 9 more budgets for the growth and renewal bits.
I’m the one who predicted the early election! in part because it would be a record summer for crossings, it annually shoots up from July. Look at you trying to use it against a newbie government, you concede how very much more potent the attack would have been against a long term incumbent, this surge from July? The channel crossings follow a heavy previous year of Europe filling up. I’m now predicting a mix of offshore processing and more quick return deals will change the “Europe filling up” picture across all Europe in coming years.
And you have to take into account how remembering happens in politics, details, reasoning, and fairness never comes into voters minds. Voters won’t remember the world post covid economic reboot sent inflation up everywhere, made worse by invasion of Ukraine meaning UK exposed to gas prices going up, going up due to European countries over reliance on Russian imports. No. Such honest details will be long gone. In 2029 and 2034, voters will remember inflation up and mortgages up because of stupid and incompetent Tory governments. And if inflation and mortgage costs have gone down and stayed low under Labour, you saying this won’t give Labour any General Election credibility and bounce?
The political history states, if voters feel better off May 3rd 2029 compared July 24, it will come with, help generate, a very poor view of last Conservative government.
Your post and its optimism comes across as trying to avoid known political realities of how this thing likely plays out. It might be Labour don’t do very well achieving their goals - but you cannot be so cocksure of this so early. If they do achieve those goals, eating into such a landslide will be such hard work. You have to accept my view of this, because that’s how it always actually works.
Only shocking thing is that he didn't make the jump a decade ago.
He used to have an office at CCHQ when he ran the Conservative Christian Fellowship, he will certainly try and shift Reform in a more socially conservative direction. He joins Ann Widdecombe as the main representative of the Christian right in Reform
I'm not so sure about that last point; there's also something Christian Right about Richard Tice imo.
On Monty, back in the day he was a social conservative wrt private life / more liberal wrt public life, following the values of the Centre for Social Justice - which iirc placed itself in the "Inspired by Wilberforce" type of tradition. I pin them as a more traditionalist fellow travellers with eg Michael Schluter (Keep Sunday Special / Relationship Foundation). And they worked on issues like developing Universal Credit and the work on Modern Slavery. At that time he was alongside IDS.
I'm not quite clear how he took (in my view) quite such a sharp turn right, as he got older. Influence of groups like Christian Concern and National Conservatives? Monty himself is imo too thoughtful to swallow the unalloyed Trumpvangelical lines.
He was also present on at least one of the Iwerne (ie the Smyth ones that Welby resigned over) camps as a boy, which were aimed at encouraging potential societal leaders in evangelicalism. https://youtu.be/ja-SyadpUJs?t=108 (Talk-TV - fair amount of ranting.)
I don't know his stance now. OTOH he handwaves away McMurdock's not having disclosed (ie lied about) his history of partner violence, and left his wife for Isobel Oakeshott. But he has a strong public life / private life split.
There's something there, that I have not got a detailed handle on yet. Someone needs to ask him if he was in the Christian Union when he was at Salford University.
I see Farage and Tice not the Tories taking voters from Labour should they fail to rally in the next four years and you won't get a look in. Your party has lost their press, that should worry you.
The process of Reform becoming the mainstream opposition could happen astonishingly quickly if Badenoch falters.
I see Farage and Tice not the Tories taking voters from Labour should they fail to rally in the next four years and you won't get a look in. Your party has lost their press, that should worry you.
The process of Reform becoming the mainstream opposition could happen astonishingly quickly if Badenoch falters.
I'm not sure they will qualify as "mainstream."
AFAICS, with my MP being Reform, they have remarkably little to say.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
You said "when the wind isn't blowing". Building and maintaining wind turbines isn't cheap.
Ummm: I thought you were talking about natural gas?
Irrespective, what does the cost of building have to do with anything? If the guy who built the wind turbines doesn't make his cost of capital or goes bust, then the wind turbines still exist, and still generate power.
There are many power plants in the UK that went bust at one point or another, usually due to over-leverage, and then got picked up for pennies on the dollar.
I was talking about everything else in the context of your panglossian view of solar.
The lifespan of a turbine is only about 20-25 years. If they're an essential part of the mix despite solar, then how will the economics stack up if the price of electricity becomes "spectacularly cheap"?
Oh, in the long run, wind doesn't make sense either. I wouldn't be queuing up to invest in wind turbines today.
But here's the chart:
That's solar price per watt over time. Basically, it's dropped by 20% every year. (Wind by contrast has improved by maybe 2%.)
A bet against solar is a bet that that 20% stops. And it might. But you'd be a brave man betting against it.
Should the likes of Spain, Portugal not be building huge wind farms with interconnectors to the rest of Europe?
Build 500%+ of their own electricity needs and become huge energy exporters.
Export to whom?
I can see bits at the margins - 10, 15% of consumption.
I can't see 1200-1300 GWh being in demand per annum.
We currently import huge amounts of gas and oil from questionable countries.
Why would we (and Germany etc) not import green electricity from close allies if falling solar panel prices make cheap energy from it abundant and cheaper than fossil fuels? Especially as more of our energy usage comes from electricity rather than oil over time.
Land is more scarce in the UK for large solar panel farms, and clearly we have less sun.
OK. The argument is weak on a number of fronts.
1 - The number mentioned was 500% of Spanish consumption. That is the same as electricity used by perhaps France, UK, Italy and most of Germany (ballpark). That claim is overegged.
2 - Spain has more insolation than the UK, but it's not *that* much more. Maybe 40% more (1500 kWh/sqm, vs 1000-1100 for England over a year). Seasonal profiles are similar, so they can't do much for us in winter; they will need it themselves as output will fall by 80-90% over summer. That needs wind or other, or inter-seasonal storage - which was a 1990s dream now largely found wanting.
Spanish solar just does not address our core seasonal need profile.
3 - Winter is wind, tidal (if the dream can be scaled up) or other.
4 - We won't want to be more dependent on any country. We knew that was a bad idea, and Ukraine-Russia has driven it home - even more so eg for Germany-Italy than us. We are also getting a rapid lesson in long undersea cables, though just the first week of WW1 should have taught us that.
No country will now want to import a large % of their power, and will want generation distributed for security reasons.
5 - Main electricity export country for the next decades in Western Europe is likely to be France, as it has been for the last generation.
6 - We already have resilience connections in place for ~15% of our electricity demand in place, with more coming on stream.
7 - We have hundreds of square km of roofs that we have not even touched yet. Even in domestic solar, we have installs on only 3-5% or so of suitable house roofs. Plus mixed ag-solar farming methods are developing.
8 - If the marginal cost is very little, then we can just as easily put it here for security and transmission cost reasons.
9 - It remains that reducing usage is way ahead of building more power generation as a solution. And we have a huge way to go on that, too - even though we have come a long way. Just doing a new build house properly reduces heat energy demand by 80-90%, or 50-70% for a renovation over a poorly insulated one.
That'll do for a start. :
Tidal can be scaled up. You want a bigger scale than 3.2 GW? The same power generation as Hinkley C? That lasts 180 years? So won't need completely replacing in just 30 years (wind, solar) or 60 years (nuclear)? For a fraction of the cost? Needing no fuel, creating no waste management?
Tidal has limitations but they are a long way off - In Wales alone we can build Severn (Shoots) barrage & Newport lagoon & Cardiff Lagoon & Colwyn Bay lagoon with a capacity of around 1GW each. With different tidal patterns helping to balance the power generation.
I am not a fan of Severn (Cardiff-Weston) barrage (3GW) for a number of reasons.
Only shocking thing is that he didn't make the jump a decade ago.
He used to have an office at CCHQ when he ran the Conservative Christian Fellowship, he will certainly try and shift Reform in a more socially conservative direction. He joins Ann Widdecombe as the main representative of the Christian right in Reform
Proving the old adage.
Tim Montgomerie has abandoned the Tories for Reform and as a result the quality of both parties has gone up.
That's rather clever Bart. Although one's head hurts after thinking about it.
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Ken Clark on LBC suggested that the IHT on farms is fine. He criticised the Thatcher Tories for implementing it. He also said he would remove WFP which he claimed was a last ditch Gordon throw of the dice. Both taxes he explains have been poorly sold by Reeves. He disagrees with the employers NI policy. He said her error was promising not to increase income tax and VAT. He says he would have jacked up VAT and to Hell with the popularity consequences.
Ken Clarke is too leftwing even for the LDs these days, he belongs in Starmer Labour
Good summary by Ken Clarke and you do insult him if you think he would join labour
I get the impression @HYUFD will eventually be in a Conservative Party that includes one person - himself. Everyone else has been told to go and join another party because they are not pure enough.
I was somewhat surprised that I was in the demographic which voted Labour more than any other I did vote for them for the first time, but I just naturally assumed the very young would do so even more.
It's fascinating how the Labour vote collapses and the Conservative vote soars as people gain life experience.
Or maybe it's just that they're more likely to remember what the last Labour governments were actually like?
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
I think both those issues will be forgotten about in 4 years. There will be new stuff by then.
They certainly won't be forgotten by farmers or pensioners if those round here are anything to go by, they absolutely despise Starmer and Reeves and will vote for whoever is best placed to beat Labour next time.
Same goes for small business owners spltting blood over the NI rise for employers
A week is a long time in politics. 4 years is an eon.
That would be the small businesses many if whom are exempt. Plus the majority of farmers who are exempt.
1m small businesses will pay less or no more NI next year. The government have failed dismally on the PR front as very few people understand that.
Yes, I think the doubling of the employment allowance should get more focus. It's effectively a £5,000 bung for the equivalent of any business with four or more employees on NMW. That's a tiny amount of cash for someone like Tesco, but not too bad for outfits employing 5 - 10 people.
Tesco dont get any employment allowance - if your total NI bill >£100k you arent eligible.
But a million other businesses will benefit from it..
Our NI bill was £139k last year, which whilst hardly Tesco is definitely over £100k and the sort of SME Reeves is going to try and wring every last penny out of. My daughter's nursery is also likely to be clobbered I think
At least 143 people in DR Congo have died from an unidentified illness, according to local officials. Victims reported flu-like symptoms, including high fever, severe headaches, cough and anaemia. Samples are being taken to identify the illness.
At least 143 people in DR Congo have died from an unidentified illness, according to local officials. Victims reported flu-like symptoms, including high fever, severe headaches, cough and anaemia. Samples are being taken to identify the illness.
Tidal has limitations but they are a long way off - In Wales alone we can build Severn (Shoots) barrage & Newport lagoon & Cardiff Lagoon & Colwyn Bay lagoon with a capacity of around 1GW each. With different tidal patterns helping to balance the power generation.
I am not a fan of Severn (Cardiff-Weston) barrage (3GW) for a number of reasons.
Your numbers are way off. There is no need for a barrage.
A Cardiff lagoon alone with two banks of turbines generates 3.2 GW. That requires 22km of sea wall, utilising a 9.7m average height between high and low tide.
I see Farage and Tice not the Tories taking voters from Labour should they fail to rally in the next four years and you won't get a look in. Your party has lost their press, that should worry you.
The process of Reform becoming the mainstream opposition could happen astonishingly quickly if Badenoch falters.
The danger for Badenoch is an MP taking local soundings and jumping ship. The pressure *not* to do it will be immense. But If one does, they won't be the last.
At least 143 people in DR Congo have died from an unidentified illness, according to local officials. Victims reported flu-like symptoms, including high fever, severe headaches, cough and anaemia. Samples are being taken to identify the illness.
After.enjoying the initial relief from the Twitter sewer, I'm finding Bluesky beginning to grate a little. There tends to be somewhat of a surfeit of self-important young students who believe they've got eveything sussed.
Just like us 20-50 years ago, then !
Indeed.
Bluesky seems to be the place to be if a young American student who believes oneself to be immensely sophisticated, but in fact often shows signs of a very binary view if things, and Twitter is the place to be if you're a Trumpist mad loon.
Try some different feeds. I don't have this problem.
He can talk all he wants - any Government that gives the Caribbean money for something that happened 200 years ago is going to lose all subsequent elections...
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
You said "when the wind isn't blowing". Building and maintaining wind turbines isn't cheap.
Ummm: I thought you were talking about natural gas?
Irrespective, what does the cost of building have to do with anything? If the guy who built the wind turbines doesn't make his cost of capital or goes bust, then the wind turbines still exist, and still generate power.
There are many power plants in the UK that went bust at one point or another, usually due to over-leverage, and then got picked up for pennies on the dollar.
I was talking about everything else in the context of your panglossian view of solar.
The lifespan of a turbine is only about 20-25 years. If they're an essential part of the mix despite solar, then how will the economics stack up if the price of electricity becomes "spectacularly cheap"?
Oh, in the long run, wind doesn't make sense either. I wouldn't be queuing up to invest in wind turbines today.
But here's the chart:
That's solar price per watt over time. Basically, it's dropped by 20% every year. (Wind by contrast has improved by maybe 2%.)
A bet against solar is a bet that that 20% stops. And it might. But you'd be a brave man betting against it.
Should the likes of Spain, Portugal not be building huge wind farms with interconnectors to the rest of Europe?
Build 500%+ of their own electricity needs and become huge energy exporters.
You mean solar?
And yes, they should.
Which implies you don't think domestic solar can be sufficient, otherwise the transport costs wouldn't be worth it.
Not necessarily.
In the long term, solar panels will be so cheap that we'll cover the UK in them.
But in the medium term, panels in North Africa and the Iberian peninsular make perfect sense. And they'll keep being useful even after the UK is covered in panels, because daylight hours are so much longer in winter there.
The issue with solar is that while California's electricity demand spikes in the summer when the sun is shining and the air con is going on, the UK's demands spike in winter when it is dark 16 hours of a day and the heating is on.
Solar absolutely is great at marginal costs when it works, but I don't see it as being as reliable as eg wind etc personally.
Three or four years I would have agreed with you. However now the cost of batteries (sometimes living inside an EV) is plummeting.
We’ve not yet got a battery, but I know plenty of smug MC families bragging about their low or even zero electricity bills.
Give it a few years and this will be widespread. Doesn’t help the buggers living in tenements though
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in combining batteries with renewables.
Batteries will help smooth out power fluctuations for a few hours, to a few days. Great for eg night (in summer for solar) or when the wind isn't blowing (for wind).
What batteries won't do is smooth out seasons and that's my problem. We aren't going to be storing power from sunshine from July to be using in January.
For us to generate enough electricity to get us through midwinter from solar we're going to be needing to generate orders of magnitude more than we need in summer, because generation is going to be that right down in winter as demand surges.
Especially if we're moving to electric heating like heat pumps etc - the seasonal differential is already bad enough before that.
He can talk all he wants - any Government that gives the Caribbean money for something that happened 200 years ago is going to lose all subsequent elections...
I agree, and SKS clearly realises that, but this does seem to be another issue that the Corbynite left seems to be adopting as a worthy cause so we will hear more and more of it as time goes on.
Strange but true, of course the bleating doom mongers at Sky / BBC and especially Peston at ITV who predicted soaring interest rates over a sustained spell....FACTUALLY...5 year Gilts back below pre budget levels very quickly and similar downward spikes for shorter terms too. Global factors as always and of course also NOT REPORTED The Business Confidence index figure across Western Europe almost all below 50 (negative confidence) and almost all appreciably lower than UK....sometimes a little balance is required!
After.enjoying the initial relief from the Twitter sewer, I'm finding Bluesky beginning to grate a little. There tends to be somewhat of a surfeit of self-important young students who believe they've got eveything sussed.
Just like us 20-50 years ago, then !
Indeed.
Bluesky seems to be the place to be if a young American student who believes oneself to be immensely sophisticated, but in fact often shows signs of a very binary view if things, and Twitter is the place to be if you're a Trumpist mad loon.
Try some different feeds. I don't have this problem.
I am still on twitter and perfectly happy with it. It does not seem to be anywhere near as bad as people say it is, even what I was saying about it 6 or so weeks ago.
I think it improved for losing some of the self important types too.
In what will be a suprise to the "they should just take it out of their excessive profits" brigade the Chancellor has admitted it will not be easy for businesses to absorb the NI hike in the same week celebrity chef, Tom Kerridge, suffered from Buyers remorse over his backing of Labour.
This website is at its best when we have people across the spectrum so it’s good to have a genuine Starmer supporter here other than myself.
I’d hope we can also get some Badenoch supporters in time.
Some would prefer a right wing or left wing echo chamber. I come here specifically to avoid that, so please let’s hope it continues as is.
Most people on here seem to have already forgotten about Badenoch.
Not me and I am content to give her time
She is young and very different and nobody knows just how she will evolve over time
The choice at the next GE is already set up to be a Tory and Reform government (whether Badenoch or Farage ended up PM would depend on which of them won most seats) or a Starmer government propped up by the LDs.
Starmer and his government's popularity has plunged so far the chances of another Labour majority are very slim
Far too early to be sure of that. If Labour deliver on income renewal, people go into polling on Thursday May 3rd 2029 feeling financially a lot better off than at the last election day, Starmer’s Labour will get another landslide win, as that will trump absolutely everything else on the day. Though some of the other metrics, like NHS, asylum application processing and boat crossings, economic growth, house building, sewage spills, could be seen as successful turnarounds on the next GE day too.
Would you say Black Wednesday and mortgage rates played a big part in the 1997 election making Tories unpopular, and at the same time say much lower mortgage rates in May 29 compared July 24 won’t help Labour popularity one bit?
Income renewal? How? This tax rising government is already hitting growth, unemployment is rising again, inflation which Rishi was getting a grip on back up too. Not to mention its complete inability to control the boats.
Nope, Labour is near done already, its best hope is scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs.
If Farage eats further into the white working class Labour vote however Labour is done and he could even enter government in a deal with Badenoch who has made some gains on the latest polls with middle class voters who voted Labour in July
It’s coming across a bit weird that you not accepting the actual situation.
“Income renewal? How? This tax rising government is already hitting growth, unemployment is rising again, inflation which Rishi was getting a grip on back up too. Not to mention its complete inability to control the boats. Nope, Labour is near done already”.
There was always going to be a big tax raising and public service spending budget whoever won the election. Inflation was always going to be back up this winter because of its link to energy price rises, regardless who won the election. The fact they didn’t go big for growth and income renewal straight away, letting more inflation out the bag, is to their credit. Early days on their policies for controlling the boats, though they are getting some surprisingly quick success on processing the Conservatives just couldn’t manage.
Are you seriously trying to convince me, May 3rd 2029, all that voters will remember is this autumns boat crossings and budget, not anything and everything between now and then? 🤦♀️
They have complete control of the machinery for nearly five years, at least 9 more budgets for the growth and renewal bits.
I’m the one who predicted the early election! in part because it would be a record summer for crossings, it annually shoots up from July. Look at you trying to use it against a newbie government, you concede how very much more potent the attack would have been against a long term incumbent, this surge from July? The channel crossings follow a heavy previous year of Europe filling up. I’m now predicting a mix of offshore processing and more quick return deals will change the “Europe filling up” picture across all Europe in coming years.
And you have to take into account how remembering happens in politics, details, reasoning, and fairness never comes into voters minds. Voters won’t remember the world post covid economic reboot sent inflation up everywhere, made worse by invasion of Ukraine meaning UK exposed to gas prices going up, going up due to European countries over reliance on Russian imports. No. Such honest details will be long gone. In 2029 and 2034, voters will remember inflation up and mortgages up because of stupid and incompetent Tory governments. And if inflation and mortgage costs have gone down and stayed low under Labour, you saying this won’t give Labour any General Election credibility and bounce?
The political history states, if voters feel better off May 3rd 2029 compared July 24, it will come with, help generate, a very poor view of last Conservative government.
Your post and its optimism comes across as trying to avoid known political realities of how this thing likely plays out. It might be Labour don’t do very well achieving their goals - but you cannot be so cocksure of this so early. If they do achieve those goals, eating into such a landslide will be such hard work. You have to accept my view of this, because that’s how it always actually works.
Er, no. HYU's post comes over as sensible analysis of the political realities. Yours comes over as confused guff.
By their tax and spend doom budget that has increased the cost of borrowing and will drive up mortgage rates, the Government have fully implicated themselves in the economic pain the country is experiencing - no way anyone will be buying the 'the other lot did it' argument four years from now. Even if the econony mounts an unprecedented comeback, they will not benefit electorally, just as the Tories failed to benefit in 1997 for their genuine economic comeback.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
You said "when the wind isn't blowing". Building and maintaining wind turbines isn't cheap.
Ummm: I thought you were talking about natural gas?
Irrespective, what does the cost of building have to do with anything? If the guy who built the wind turbines doesn't make his cost of capital or goes bust, then the wind turbines still exist, and still generate power.
There are many power plants in the UK that went bust at one point or another, usually due to over-leverage, and then got picked up for pennies on the dollar.
I was talking about everything else in the context of your panglossian view of solar.
The lifespan of a turbine is only about 20-25 years. If they're an essential part of the mix despite solar, then how will the economics stack up if the price of electricity becomes "spectacularly cheap"?
Oh, in the long run, wind doesn't make sense either. I wouldn't be queuing up to invest in wind turbines today.
But here's the chart:
That's solar price per watt over time. Basically, it's dropped by 20% every year. (Wind by contrast has improved by maybe 2%.)
A bet against solar is a bet that that 20% stops. And it might. But you'd be a brave man betting against it.
Should the likes of Spain, Portugal not be building huge wind farms with interconnectors to the rest of Europe?
Build 500%+ of their own electricity needs and become huge energy exporters.
You mean solar?
And yes, they should.
Which implies you don't think domestic solar can be sufficient, otherwise the transport costs wouldn't be worth it.
Not necessarily.
In the long term, solar panels will be so cheap that we'll cover the UK in them.
But in the medium term, panels in North Africa and the Iberian peninsular make perfect sense. And they'll keep being useful even after the UK is covered in panels, because daylight hours are so much longer in winter there.
The issue with solar is that while California's electricity demand spikes in the summer when the sun is shining and the air con is going on, the UK's demands spike in winter when it is dark 16 hours of a day and the heating is on.
Solar absolutely is great at marginal costs when it works, but I don't see it as being as reliable as eg wind etc personally.
Three or four years I would have agreed with you. However now the cost of batteries (sometimes living inside an EV) is plummeting.
We’ve not yet got a battery, but I know plenty of smug MC families bragging about their low or even zero electricity bills.
Give it a few years and this will be widespread. Doesn’t help the buggers living in tenements though
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in combining batteries with renewables.
Batteries will help smooth out power fluctuations for a few hours, to a few days. Great for eg night (in summer for solar) or when the wind isn't blowing (for wind).
What batteries won't do is smooth out seasons and that's my problem. We aren't going to be storing power from sunshine from July to be using in January.
For us to generate enough electricity to get us through midwinter from solar we're going to be needing to generate orders of magnitude more than we need in summer, because generation is going to be that right down in winter as demand surges.
Especially if we're moving to electric heating like heat pumps etc - the seasonal differential is already bad enough before that.
I see Farage and Tice not the Tories taking voters from Labour should they fail to rally in the next four years and you won't get a look in. Your party has lost their press, that should worry you.
The process of Reform becoming the mainstream opposition could happen astonishingly quickly if Badenoch falters.
The danger for Badenoch is an MP taking local soundings and jumping ship. The pressure *not* to do it will be immense. But If one does, they won't be the last.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
You said "when the wind isn't blowing". Building and maintaining wind turbines isn't cheap.
Ummm: I thought you were talking about natural gas?
Irrespective, what does the cost of building have to do with anything? If the guy who built the wind turbines doesn't make his cost of capital or goes bust, then the wind turbines still exist, and still generate power.
There are many power plants in the UK that went bust at one point or another, usually due to over-leverage, and then got picked up for pennies on the dollar.
I was talking about everything else in the context of your panglossian view of solar.
The lifespan of a turbine is only about 20-25 years. If they're an essential part of the mix despite solar, then how will the economics stack up if the price of electricity becomes "spectacularly cheap"?
Oh, in the long run, wind doesn't make sense either. I wouldn't be queuing up to invest in wind turbines today.
But here's the chart:
That's solar price per watt over time. Basically, it's dropped by 20% every year. (Wind by contrast has improved by maybe 2%.)
A bet against solar is a bet that that 20% stops. And it might. But you'd be a brave man betting against it.
Should the likes of Spain, Portugal not be building huge wind farms with interconnectors to the rest of Europe?
Build 500%+ of their own electricity needs and become huge energy exporters.
You mean solar?
And yes, they should.
Which implies you don't think domestic solar can be sufficient, otherwise the transport costs wouldn't be worth it.
Not necessarily.
In the long term, solar panels will be so cheap that we'll cover the UK in them.
But in the medium term, panels in North Africa and the Iberian peninsular make perfect sense. And they'll keep being useful even after the UK is covered in panels, because daylight hours are so much longer in winter there.
The issue with solar is that while California's electricity demand spikes in the summer when the sun is shining and the air con is going on, the UK's demands spike in winter when it is dark 16 hours of a day and the heating is on.
Solar absolutely is great at marginal costs when it works, but I don't see it as being as reliable as eg wind etc personally.
Three or four years I would have agreed with you. However now the cost of batteries (sometimes living inside an EV) is plummeting.
We’ve not yet got a battery, but I know plenty of smug MC families bragging about their low or even zero electricity bills.
Give it a few years and this will be widespread. Doesn’t help the buggers living in tenements though
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in combining batteries with renewables.
Batteries will help smooth out power fluctuations for a few hours, to a few days. Great for eg night (in summer for solar) or when the wind isn't blowing (for wind).
What batteries won't do is smooth out seasons and that's my problem. We aren't going to be storing power from sunshine from July to be using in January.
For us to generate enough electricity to get us through midwinter from solar we're going to be needing to generate orders of magnitude more than we need in summer, because generation is going to be that right down in winter as demand surges.
Especially if we're moving to electric heating like heat pumps etc - the seasonal differential is already bad enough before that.
Strange but true, of course the bleating doom mongers at Sky / BBC and especially Peston at ITV who predicted soaring interest rates over a sustained spell....FACTUALLY...5 year Gilts back below pre budget levels very quickly and similar downward spikes for shorter terms too. Global factors as always and of course also NOT REPORTED The Business Confidence index figure across Western Europe almost all below 50 (negative confidence) and almost all appreciably lower than UK....sometimes a little balance is required!
Indeed. Ours has not been below 50 for over a year until November. So the fact Europe is lower is not really any comfort.
As for treasury yields, yes they have come down but they are still elevated from what they were in the summer so not necessarily cause for celebration.
The media does not do balance. It does sensationalism and short termism. Labour should have realised that seeing how the Tories were treated by it. Expecting the media to change tack due to the change in govt is naive.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
You said "when the wind isn't blowing". Building and maintaining wind turbines isn't cheap.
Ummm: I thought you were talking about natural gas?
Irrespective, what does the cost of building have to do with anything? If the guy who built the wind turbines doesn't make his cost of capital or goes bust, then the wind turbines still exist, and still generate power.
There are many power plants in the UK that went bust at one point or another, usually due to over-leverage, and then got picked up for pennies on the dollar.
I was talking about everything else in the context of your panglossian view of solar.
The lifespan of a turbine is only about 20-25 years. If they're an essential part of the mix despite solar, then how will the economics stack up if the price of electricity becomes "spectacularly cheap"?
Oh, in the long run, wind doesn't make sense either. I wouldn't be queuing up to invest in wind turbines today.
But here's the chart:
That's solar price per watt over time. Basically, it's dropped by 20% every year. (Wind by contrast has improved by maybe 2%.)
A bet against solar is a bet that that 20% stops. And it might. But you'd be a brave man betting against it.
Should the likes of Spain, Portugal not be building huge wind farms with interconnectors to the rest of Europe?
Build 500%+ of their own electricity needs and become huge energy exporters.
You mean solar?
And yes, they should.
Which implies you don't think domestic solar can be sufficient, otherwise the transport costs wouldn't be worth it.
Not necessarily.
In the long term, solar panels will be so cheap that we'll cover the UK in them.
But in the medium term, panels in North Africa and the Iberian peninsular make perfect sense. And they'll keep being useful even after the UK is covered in panels, because daylight hours are so much longer in winter there.
The issue with solar is that while California's electricity demand spikes in the summer when the sun is shining and the air con is going on, the UK's demands spike in winter when it is dark 16 hours of a day and the heating is on.
Solar absolutely is great at marginal costs when it works, but I don't see it as being as reliable as eg wind etc personally.
Three or four years I would have agreed with you. However now the cost of batteries (sometimes living inside an EV) is plummeting.
We’ve not yet got a battery, but I know plenty of smug MC families bragging about their low or even zero electricity bills.
Give it a few years and this will be widespread. Doesn’t help the buggers living in tenements though
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in combining batteries with renewables.
Batteries will help smooth out power fluctuations for a few hours, to a few days. Great for eg night (in summer for solar) or when the wind isn't blowing (for wind).
What batteries won't do is smooth out seasons and that's my problem. We aren't going to be storing power from sunshine from July to be using in January.
For us to generate enough electricity to get us through midwinter from solar we're going to be needing to generate orders of magnitude more than we need in summer, because generation is going to be that right down in winter as demand surges.
Especially if we're moving to electric heating like heat pumps etc - the seasonal differential is already bad enough before that.
I was somewhat surprised that I was in the demographic which voted Labour more than any other I did vote for them for the first time, but I just naturally assumed the very young would do so even more.
It's fascinating how the Labour vote collapses and the Conservative vote soars as people gain life experience.
Or maybe it's just that they're more likely to remember what the last Labour governments were actually like?
After.enjoying the initial relief from the Twitter sewer, I'm finding Bluesky beginning to grate a little. There tends to be somewhat of a surfeit of self-important young students who believe they've got eveything sussed.
Is that why you’re posting here? To balance it out with a group of middle-aged and older people who believe they’ve got everything sussed?
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
You said "when the wind isn't blowing". Building and maintaining wind turbines isn't cheap.
Ummm: I thought you were talking about natural gas?
Irrespective, what does the cost of building have to do with anything? If the guy who built the wind turbines doesn't make his cost of capital or goes bust, then the wind turbines still exist, and still generate power.
There are many power plants in the UK that went bust at one point or another, usually due to over-leverage, and then got picked up for pennies on the dollar.
I was talking about everything else in the context of your panglossian view of solar.
The lifespan of a turbine is only about 20-25 years. If they're an essential part of the mix despite solar, then how will the economics stack up if the price of electricity becomes "spectacularly cheap"?
Oh, in the long run, wind doesn't make sense either. I wouldn't be queuing up to invest in wind turbines today.
But here's the chart:
That's solar price per watt over time. Basically, it's dropped by 20% every year. (Wind by contrast has improved by maybe 2%.)
A bet against solar is a bet that that 20% stops. And it might. But you'd be a brave man betting against it.
Should the likes of Spain, Portugal not be building huge wind farms with interconnectors to the rest of Europe?
Build 500%+ of their own electricity needs and become huge energy exporters.
You mean solar?
And yes, they should.
Which implies you don't think domestic solar can be sufficient, otherwise the transport costs wouldn't be worth it.
Not necessarily.
In the long term, solar panels will be so cheap that we'll cover the UK in them.
But in the medium term, panels in North Africa and the Iberian peninsular make perfect sense. And they'll keep being useful even after the UK is covered in panels, because daylight hours are so much longer in winter there.
The issue with solar is that while California's electricity demand spikes in the summer when the sun is shining and the air con is going on, the UK's demands spike in winter when it is dark 16 hours of a day and the heating is on.
Solar absolutely is great at marginal costs when it works, but I don't see it as being as reliable as eg wind etc personally.
Three or four years I would have agreed with you. However now the cost of batteries (sometimes living inside an EV) is plummeting.
We’ve not yet got a battery, but I know plenty of smug MC families bragging about their low or even zero electricity bills.
Give it a few years and this will be widespread. Doesn’t help the buggers living in tenements though
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in combining batteries with renewables.
Batteries will help smooth out power fluctuations for a few hours, to a few days. Great for eg night (in summer for solar) or when the wind isn't blowing (for wind).
What batteries won't do is smooth out seasons and that's my problem. We aren't going to be storing power from sunshine from July to be using in January.
For us to generate enough electricity to get us through midwinter from solar we're going to be needing to generate orders of magnitude more than we need in summer, because generation is going to be that right down in winter as demand surges.
Especially if we're moving to electric heating like heat pumps etc - the seasonal differential is already bad enough before that.
What's interesting is developing energy storage doesn't appear to be good value, because the marginal gains from doing so are very small compared with just sticking more turbines up.
This is some back-of-envelope calculations using day average consumption in 2024, so illustrative only:
Days self-sufficient, 2024
Renewable generation - WIth no storage/With 200GWh storage/With 400GWh storage
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
You said "when the wind isn't blowing". Building and maintaining wind turbines isn't cheap.
Ummm: I thought you were talking about natural gas?
Irrespective, what does the cost of building have to do with anything? If the guy who built the wind turbines doesn't make his cost of capital or goes bust, then the wind turbines still exist, and still generate power.
There are many power plants in the UK that went bust at one point or another, usually due to over-leverage, and then got picked up for pennies on the dollar.
I was talking about everything else in the context of your panglossian view of solar.
The lifespan of a turbine is only about 20-25 years. If they're an essential part of the mix despite solar, then how will the economics stack up if the price of electricity becomes "spectacularly cheap"?
Oh, in the long run, wind doesn't make sense either. I wouldn't be queuing up to invest in wind turbines today.
But here's the chart:
That's solar price per watt over time. Basically, it's dropped by 20% every year. (Wind by contrast has improved by maybe 2%.)
A bet against solar is a bet that that 20% stops. And it might. But you'd be a brave man betting against it.
Should the likes of Spain, Portugal not be building huge wind farms with interconnectors to the rest of Europe?
Build 500%+ of their own electricity needs and become huge energy exporters.
You mean solar?
And yes, they should.
Which implies you don't think domestic solar can be sufficient, otherwise the transport costs wouldn't be worth it.
Not necessarily.
In the long term, solar panels will be so cheap that we'll cover the UK in them.
But in the medium term, panels in North Africa and the Iberian peninsular make perfect sense. And they'll keep being useful even after the UK is covered in panels, because daylight hours are so much longer in winter there.
The issue with solar is that while California's electricity demand spikes in the summer when the sun is shining and the air con is going on, the UK's demands spike in winter when it is dark 16 hours of a day and the heating is on.
Solar absolutely is great at marginal costs when it works, but I don't see it as being as reliable as eg wind etc personally.
Three or four years I would have agreed with you. However now the cost of batteries (sometimes living inside an EV) is plummeting.
We’ve not yet got a battery, but I know plenty of smug MC families bragging about their low or even zero electricity bills.
Give it a few years and this will be widespread. Doesn’t help the buggers living in tenements though
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in combining batteries with renewables.
Batteries will help smooth out power fluctuations for a few hours, to a few days. Great for eg night (in summer for solar) or when the wind isn't blowing (for wind).
What batteries won't do is smooth out seasons and that's my problem. We aren't going to be storing power from sunshine from July to be using in January.
For us to generate enough electricity to get us through midwinter from solar we're going to be needing to generate orders of magnitude more than we need in summer, because generation is going to be that right down in winter as demand surges.
Especially if we're moving to electric heating like heat pumps etc - the seasonal differential is already bad enough before that.
What's interesting is developing energy storage doesn't appear to be good value, because the marginal gains from doing so are very small compared with just sticking more turbines up.
This is some back-of-envelope calculations using day average consumption in 2024, so illustrative only:
Days self-sufficient, 2024
Renewable generation - WIth no storage/With 200GWh storage/With 400GWh storage
Current capacity - 5%/6%/6%
2x capacity - 50%/61%/67%
3x - 79%/87%/96%
4x - 90%/97%/98%
Once the need for fossil fuels starts to touch zero on the odd day, it doesn't need much more renewable supply to touch zero on a lot of days- it's one of those graphs that is very non-linear in ways that aren't very intuitive.
And then gas becomes what it probably ought to be for now- the backup that's easy to turn on and off for the two weeks a year where it's cold, cloudy and still.
And yes, that's also a problem that needs solving, but in the meantime, don't let the best be the enemy of the good.
Specifically, solar is now so spectacularly cheap, that it is simply going to supplant the vast majority of fossil fuels, almost irrespective of government diktat.
The problem is that energy use is so elastic. As soon as energy becomes cheaper, we come up with new ways of using the stuff. So it never gets very cheap and fossil fuels remain economical.
Well, I agree that - in the medium term - energy use is pretty elastic. But it's not *that* elastic. Per capita energy consumption in the developed world peaked in the early 1970s.
And I think it's easy to miss just how cheap solar is becoming. If it's a tenth of the price per KwH of energy of gas or oil, then really, how can fossil fuels compete?
They can compete by being more controllable. Solar can't be switched on at will.
Yep, and they'll have a role - particularly gas.
But gas will only be used at night and when the wind isn't blowing.
If solar is so cheap that everything else becomes uneconomic, how will all of that infrastructure be funded?
All of what infrastructure?
The UK has gas peaking plants - OCGTs - that work perhaps 20 hours a year, when the electricity price is at its very highest level.
Modern gas plants are incredibly inexpensive to run. Unlike coal, they are low people, low maintenance, and highly automated.
You said "when the wind isn't blowing". Building and maintaining wind turbines isn't cheap.
Ummm: I thought you were talking about natural gas?
Irrespective, what does the cost of building have to do with anything? If the guy who built the wind turbines doesn't make his cost of capital or goes bust, then the wind turbines still exist, and still generate power.
There are many power plants in the UK that went bust at one point or another, usually due to over-leverage, and then got picked up for pennies on the dollar.
I was talking about everything else in the context of your panglossian view of solar.
The lifespan of a turbine is only about 20-25 years. If they're an essential part of the mix despite solar, then how will the economics stack up if the price of electricity becomes "spectacularly cheap"?
Oh, in the long run, wind doesn't make sense either. I wouldn't be queuing up to invest in wind turbines today.
But here's the chart:
That's solar price per watt over time. Basically, it's dropped by 20% every year. (Wind by contrast has improved by maybe 2%.)
A bet against solar is a bet that that 20% stops. And it might. But you'd be a brave man betting against it.
Should the likes of Spain, Portugal not be building huge wind farms with interconnectors to the rest of Europe?
Build 500%+ of their own electricity needs and become huge energy exporters.
You mean solar?
And yes, they should.
Which implies you don't think domestic solar can be sufficient, otherwise the transport costs wouldn't be worth it.
Not necessarily.
In the long term, solar panels will be so cheap that we'll cover the UK in them.
But in the medium term, panels in North Africa and the Iberian peninsular make perfect sense. And they'll keep being useful even after the UK is covered in panels, because daylight hours are so much longer in winter there.
The issue with solar is that while California's electricity demand spikes in the summer when the sun is shining and the air con is going on, the UK's demands spike in winter when it is dark 16 hours of a day and the heating is on.
Solar absolutely is great at marginal costs when it works, but I don't see it as being as reliable as eg wind etc personally.
Three or four years I would have agreed with you. However now the cost of batteries (sometimes living inside an EV) is plummeting.
We’ve not yet got a battery, but I know plenty of smug MC families bragging about their low or even zero electricity bills.
Give it a few years and this will be widespread. Doesn’t help the buggers living in tenements though
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big believer in combining batteries with renewables.
Batteries will help smooth out power fluctuations for a few hours, to a few days. Great for eg night (in summer for solar) or when the wind isn't blowing (for wind).
What batteries won't do is smooth out seasons and that's my problem. We aren't going to be storing power from sunshine from July to be using in January.
For us to generate enough electricity to get us through midwinter from solar we're going to be needing to generate orders of magnitude more than we need in summer, because generation is going to be that right down in winter as demand surges.
Especially if we're moving to electric heating like heat pumps etc - the seasonal differential is already bad enough before that.
What's interesting is developing energy storage doesn't appear to be good value, because the marginal gains from doing so are very small compared with just sticking more turbines up.
This is some back-of-envelope calculations using day average consumption in 2024, so illustrative only:
Days self-sufficient, 2024
Renewable generation - WIth no storage/With 200GWh storage/With 400GWh storage
Current capacity - 5%/6%/6%
2x capacity - 50%/61%/67%
3x - 79%/87%/96%
4x - 90%/97%/98%
For context, we current have 2.2x wind/solar capacity awaiting or under construction, or 3.4x if you include that in the planning process.
I can't find anything reliable for battery storage currently in the planning process, but it's perhaps 100GWh? The government reckons we will need 200GWh by 2040. That makes it all look quite positive, but doesn't take into account the increase in EVs and heat pumps - the demand side.
After.enjoying the initial relief from the Twitter sewer, I'm finding Bluesky beginning to grate a little. There tends to be somewhat of a surfeit of self-important young students who believe they've got eveything sussed.
Ignore them all except for PB...your life will be immeasurably better
People are motivated towards innovation, change and excitement. They are motivated against the status quo, the boring, the every day.
So the Conservative message did not resonate. Where Rishi tried to make it exciting he just put off potential voters - Conscription for 18 year olds madness.
Also, they gave the impression that governing was trivial - it must be they were a bunch of wankers and they were managing to do it. Old farts like me and old wankers like me saying Labour in government will be a disaster cut little ice.
So we are where we are. So in many ways although the result in the opinion polls is as TSE says the cause is exactly the opposite. Labour policies were always going to be detrimental to the well being of the people I meet on a daily basis. On a scale of 1 to 10 how harmful, Blair hit 4, 5 or 6 generally. I expected Starmer to hit 6 or 7 regularly and I feared the IHT on farms and small businesses albeit on a rational basis with thresholds about twice what they are. However I did not expect this constant war against me, and on the scale of 1 to 10 they generally hit 15 or 16 out of 10.
Some will cheer this but it will keep Labour out of power for the rest of my life time, and for me at least that must be a good thing.
The Reform/Conservative future government seems unlikely when so many Con MPs in last government would probably troop through the voting lobbies with anyone rather than Farage..the Con members on the other hand...🤔😏
If they don't, then they will lose the vast majority of their voters and members. People won't vote Conservative to prop up a centrist consensus.
The real (natural) difference between the Conservatives and Reform is on the role/size of the state, and economic liberalism.
The Reform/Conservative future government seems unlikely when so many Con MPs in last government would probably troop through the voting lobbies with anyone rather than Farage..the Con members on the other hand...🤔😏
If they don't, then they will lose the vast majority of their voters and members. People won't vote Conservative to prop up a centrist consensus.
The real (natural) difference between the Conservatives and Reform is on the role/size of the state, and economic liberalism.
Also on immigration, where Reform want to pull out of the ECHR and the Badenoch Tories don't
Only shocking thing is that he didn't make the jump a decade ago.
He used to have an office at CCHQ when he ran the Conservative Christian Fellowship, he will certainly try and shift Reform in a more socially conservative direction. He joins Ann Widdecombe as the main representative of the Christian right in Reform
I'm not so sure about that last point; there's also something Christian Right about Richard Tice imo.
On Monty, back in the day he was a social conservative wrt private life / more liberal wrt public life, following the values of the Centre for Social Justice - which iirc placed itself in the "Inspired by Wilberforce" type of tradition. I pin them as a more traditionalist fellow travellers with eg Michael Schluter (Keep Sunday Special / Relationship Foundation). And they worked on issues like developing Universal Credit and the work on Modern Slavery. At that time he was alongside IDS.
I'm not quite clear how he took (in my view) quite such a sharp turn right, as he got older. Influence of groups like Christian Concern and National Conservatives? Monty himself is imo too thoughtful to swallow the unalloyed Trumpvangelical lines.
He was also present on at least one of the Iwerne (ie the Smyth ones that Welby resigned over) camps as a boy, which were aimed at encouraging potential societal leaders in evangelicalism. https://youtu.be/ja-SyadpUJs?t=108 (Talk-TV - fair amount of ranting.)
I don't know his stance now. OTOH he handwaves away McMurdock's not having disclosed (ie lied about) his history of partner violence, and left his wife for Isobel Oakeshott. But he has a strong public life / private life split.
There's something there, that I have not got a detailed handle on yet. Someone needs to ask him if he was in the Christian Union when he was at Salford University.
Montie, Farage and Widdcombe all opposed assisted dying, Tice didn't.
He is a Christian but not as hardline a social conservative as the former 3, he is mainly in Reform as he is a very rich small state Thatcherite and thinks the Tories too wet economically
This website is at its best when we have people across the spectrum so it’s good to have a genuine Starmer supporter here other than myself.
I’d hope we can also get some Badenoch supporters in time.
Some would prefer a right wing or left wing echo chamber. I come here specifically to avoid that, so please let’s hope it continues as is.
Most people on here seem to have already forgotten about Badenoch.
Not me and I am content to give her time
She is young and very different and nobody knows just how she will evolve over time
The choice at the next GE is already set up to be a Tory and Reform government (whether Badenoch or Farage ended up PM would depend on which of them won most seats) or a Starmer government propped up by the LDs.
Starmer and his government's popularity has plunged so far the chances of another Labour majority are very slim
Far too early to be sure of that. If Labour deliver on income renewal, people go into polling on Thursday May 3rd 2029 feeling financially a lot better off than at the last election day, Starmer’s Labour will get another landslide win, as that will trump absolutely everything else on the day. Though some of the other metrics, like NHS, asylum application processing and boat crossings, economic growth, house building, sewage spills, could be seen as successful turnarounds on the next GE day too.
Would you say Black Wednesday and mortgage rates played a big part in the 1997 election making Tories unpopular, and at the same time say much lower mortgage rates in May 29 compared July 24 won’t help Labour popularity one bit?
Income renewal? How? This tax rising government is already hitting growth, unemployment is rising again, inflation which Rishi was getting a grip on back up too. Not to mention its complete inability to control the boats.
Nope, Labour is near done already, its best hope is scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs.
If Farage eats further into the white working class Labour vote however Labour is done and he could even enter government in a deal with Badenoch who has made some gains on the latest polls with middle class voters who voted Labour in July
I suspect you remain unaware of how reviled the Conservative Party remains despite your extrapolations from sub-samples. I'll refer to Clark again. He said that whoever won the election would become unpopular quickly because of the choices they had to make. The lady Government has left a mess. He said that as far as he is concerned employers NI was a poor means to raising tax, as I said earlier bhe would have gone straight for VAT ( a regressive tax, favoured by Tory Chancellors).
I see Farage and Tice not the Tories taking voters from Labour should they fail to rally in the next four years and you won't get a look in. Your party has lost their press, that should worry you.
Every vote Reform takes from Labour helps a Tory candidate get elected under FPTP even if the Tory vote stays still unless Reform get to 25-30% and even have a chance of winning most seats themselves if Labour and the Tories are on about the same or less
The effects of COVID and the ongoing war in Ukraine never went away. When you add in the extraordinarily crass decisions made by the new government none of this is a surprise. However, at least they'll go down in smart, expensive suits, dresses and the latest electronic gadgets like true Labour hypocrites. Truly Karma is the proverbial bitch. At least I can claim not to have voted for them - oh and I can enjoy the benefits of the triple lock - it goes a long way in sunny Spain. Reminds me, I need more aftersun!🤣🤣🤣
Only shocking thing is that he didn't make the jump a decade ago.
He used to have an office at CCHQ when he ran the Conservative Christian Fellowship, he will certainly try and shift Reform in a more socially conservative direction. He joins Ann Widdecombe as the main representative of the Christian right in Reform
Proving the old adage.
Tim Montgomerie has abandoned the Tories for Reform and as a result the quality of both parties has gone up.
That's rather clever Bart. Although one's head hurts after thinking about it.
Even if Labour does remain in office it will be scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs most likely, the price of which will be an end to the tractor tax and restored WFPs. The cost of living crisis is hitting Labour as much as other incumbent governments across the world but Starmer and Reeves have only exacerbated the impact by their decision making
The Lib Dems would be mad to focus on those policies being the price of support. They would focus elsewhere.
The LDs official policy is to oppose the WFA cut and the tractor tax, they are going for the pensioner and farmer vote who have a significant presence in LD home counties seats and they won't give Starmer any confidence and supply unless he concedes on both.
They have learnt their lesson from Clegg they need to play more hardball if they hold the balance of power again
Ken Clark on LBC suggested that the IHT on farms is fine. He criticised the Thatcher Tories for implementing it. He also said he would remove WFP which he claimed was a last ditch Gordon throw of the dice. Both taxes he explains have been poorly sold by Reeves. He disagrees with the employers NI policy. He said her error was promising not to increase income tax and VAT. He says he would have jacked up VAT and to Hell with the popularity consequences.
Ken Clarke is too leftwing even for the LDs these days, he belongs in Starmer Labour
Good summary by Ken Clarke and you do insult him if you think he would join labour
Well given he was anti Brexit and is pro tractor tax and pro WFA cut there isn't much he disagrees with Starmer on
Of course there is and not least the growth and job destroying Reeves budget
He just said he agreed with most of Reeves' budget
The central plank of Reeves budget was rejected by Clarke
No it wasn't, he backed the tractor tax and WFA cut
The NI was the central plank of the budget and why businesses are struggling with it, not WFA or tractor tax which do not effect businesses
Farms are businesses and pensioners are a huge voting block
It still doesn't alter the central objection Clarke had to the NI rise
And Clarke will not join labour
Clarke was the best Tory prinme minister we never had, they rogered themselves when they did not vote for him and are enjoying the fruits of their stupidity.
At least 143 people in DR Congo have died from an unidentified illness, according to local officials. Victims reported flu-like symptoms, including high fever, severe headaches, cough and anaemia. Samples are being taken to identify the illness.
Don't Panic Mr Mainwaring, Don't Panic
If mortality is that high and fast there’s no need to panic…
Strange but true, of course the bleating doom mongers at Sky / BBC and especially Peston at ITV who predicted soaring interest rates over a sustained spell....FACTUALLY...5 year Gilts back below pre budget levels very quickly and similar downward spikes for shorter terms too. Global factors as always and of course also NOT REPORTED The Business Confidence index figure across Western Europe almost all below 50 (negative confidence) and almost all appreciably lower than UK....sometimes a little balance is required!
I’m sure I remember saying the same thing about the Truss budget fiasco.
This website is at its best when we have people across the spectrum so it’s good to have a genuine Starmer supporter here other than myself.
I’d hope we can also get some Badenoch supporters in time.
Some would prefer a right wing or left wing echo chamber. I come here specifically to avoid that, so please let’s hope it continues as is.
Most people on here seem to have already forgotten about Badenoch.
Not me and I am content to give her time
She is young and very different and nobody knows just how she will evolve over time
The choice at the next GE is already set up to be a Tory and Reform government (whether Badenoch or Farage ended up PM would depend on which of them won most seats) or a Starmer government propped up by the LDs.
Starmer and his government's popularity has plunged so far the chances of another Labour majority are very slim
Far too early to be sure of that. If Labour deliver on income renewal, people go into polling on Thursday May 3rd 2029 feeling financially a lot better off than at the last election day, Starmer’s Labour will get another landslide win, as that will trump absolutely everything else on the day. Though some of the other metrics, like NHS, asylum application processing and boat crossings, economic growth, house building, sewage spills, could be seen as successful turnarounds on the next GE day too.
Would you say Black Wednesday and mortgage rates played a big part in the 1997 election making Tories unpopular, and at the same time say much lower mortgage rates in May 29 compared July 24 won’t help Labour popularity one bit?
Income renewal? How? This tax rising government is already hitting growth, unemployment is rising again, inflation which Rishi was getting a grip on back up too. Not to mention its complete inability to control the boats.
Nope, Labour is near done already, its best hope is scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs.
If Farage eats further into the white working class Labour vote however Labour is done and he could even enter government in a deal with Badenoch who has made some gains on the latest polls with middle class voters who voted Labour in July
It’s coming across a bit weird that you not accepting the actual situation.
“Income renewal? How? This tax rising government is already hitting growth, unemployment is rising again, inflation which Rishi was getting a grip on back up too. Not to mention its complete inability to control the boats. Nope, Labour is near done already”.
There was always going to be a big tax raising and public service spending budget whoever won the election. Inflation was always going to be back up this winter because of its link to energy price rises, regardless who won the election. The fact they didn’t go big for growth and income renewal straight away, letting more inflation out the bag, is to their credit. Early days on their policies for controlling the boats, though they are getting some surprisingly quick success on processing the Conservatives just couldn’t manage.
Are you seriously trying to convince me, May 3rd 2029, all that voters will remember is this autumns boat crossings and budget, not anything and everything between now and then? 🤦♀️
They have complete control of the machinery for nearly five years, at least 9 more budgets for the growth and renewal bits.
I’m the one who predicted the early election! in part because it would be a record summer for crossings, it annually shoots up from July. Look at you trying to use it against a newbie government, you concede how very much more potent the attack would have been against a long term incumbent, this surge from July? The channel crossings follow a heavy previous year of Europe filling up. I’m now predicting a mix of offshore processing and more quick return deals will change the “Europe filling up” picture across all Europe in coming years.
And you have to take into account how remembering happens in politics, details, reasoning, and fairness never comes into voters minds. Voters won’t remember the world post covid economic reboot sent inflation up everywhere, made worse by invasion of Ukraine meaning UK exposed to gas prices going up, going up due to European countries over reliance on Russian imports. No. Such honest details will be long gone. In 2029 and 2034, voters will remember inflation up and mortgages up because of stupid and incompetent Tory governments. And if inflation and mortgage costs have gone down and stayed low under Labour, you saying this won’t give Labour any General Election credibility and bounce?
The political history states, if voters feel better off May 3rd 2029 compared July 24, it will come with, help generate, a very poor view of last Conservative government.
Your post and its optimism comes across as trying to avoid known political realities of how this thing likely plays out. It might be Labour don’t do very well achieving their goals - but you cannot be so cocksure of this so early. If they do achieve those goals, eating into such a landslide will be such hard work. You have to accept my view of this, because that’s how it always actually works.
Er, no. HYU's post comes over as sensible analysis of the political realities. Yours comes over as confused guff.
By their tax and spend doom budget that has increased the cost of borrowing and will drive up mortgage rates, the Government have fully implicated themselves in the economic pain the country is experiencing - no way anyone will be buying the 'the other lot did it' argument four years from now. Even if the econony mounts an unprecedented comeback, they will not benefit electorally, just as the Tories failed to benefit in 1997 for their genuine economic comeback.
But at least you have posted your view is taking me on, on the very nub of it. how much of “doom budget implicating them” is spin - politically motivated by those who have trashed their reputation for economic competence and concerned what that might mean on future General Election dates? And to what extent having incumbency and control of the machinery blows that “better economy won’t matter a jot” argument in your post out the water when it comes to 3rd May 2029?
That’s the nub of it. Economy will be better, voters will feel better off? But will this decide the 2029 election?
I’m arguing voters actually voted for that tax and spend budget for repair of public services. And in voters eyes, the Conservative Parties reputation for economic competence is now in the gutter. And both these is electorally fundamental.
That’s the point I’m making between narrative on one hand and how voters behave on the other. The reality is Conservatives have dug themselves into a General Election hole, and having lost the machinery they don’t have control over their own fate. But this reality isn’t coming across from a lot of PB posters.
At least in your post is the admittance HY won’t do, the comparison on economy performance likely will be there - but then you slipped away from reality by insisting it just won’t matter a jot. The weakness in your post was mentioning 1997 as reference point. I’d argue back, getting into voters minds, 97 came at end of a run, not the start of one. This is more like 1979 that led to 18 years before opposition was trusted with government again. And through those 4 election wins, trusting the incumbent with the economy, not trusting the opposition with the economy, was the base for the victory.
Governments take a lot of flak - it’s almost like being put in stocks, and those in stocks last week throw stuff with glee - but governments still come back and win the GE. Actually being in stocks taking flak does come with magic wands. This is reality fundamental of how general election electoral guff works. There’s an awful lot fools gold in polling and voting nights to come for the opposition parties between now and May 3rd 2029 - but the reality of general election electoral guff is already before us imo.
This is an example of Twitter at it's more useful.
Obscure and and unread photos by someone on the odd-goings on in New Jersey , who does not appear to be your typical conspiracist extremist. Unverifiable, but interesting anyway.
Comments
Personally I am not convinced that Deliverism is going to win Labour another term, but I see it in my workplace too, with a strong emphasis on unblocking productivity from our SMT.
But it might work.
She is young and very different and nobody knows just how she will evolve over time
Starmer and his government's popularity has plunged so far the chances of another Labour majority are very slim
And Clarke will not join labour
But I agree with you, the future depends on what sort of unique and niche position Badenoch’s leadership comes to be known for over time. Will the clear blue water positions she carves out between her and Starmer’s Labour be popular with the public, or will it frighten them off?
The rapid public reaction to it, and the military bottling it when confronted, seems to have saved the day.
Also remarkable that they got a majority of assembly members into parliament so quickly.
Democratic Party revealed military planned to arrest Assembly Speaker and party leaders under martial law; reviewing possible insurrection charges.
https://x.com/yejinjgim/status/1864028396482650586
Chinese battery firms capture an estimated 84% of global profit on 44% on the invested capital and collectively generate ~24% RoIC.
This is where all the missing EV profits are, folks.
https://x.com/GlennLuk/status/1863807796262605008
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cn38321180et
Would you say Black Wednesday and mortgage rates played a big part in the 1997 election making Tories unpopular, and at the same time say much lower mortgage rates in May 29 compared July 24 won’t help Labour popularity one bit?
But the outcome could have been very different, with some relatively small changes in circumstances.
A soldier apparently pointed a gun at an opposition party spokesperson. President Yoon must stop pretending to be a defender of democracy. I'll never forget what happened today.
https://x.com/yejinjgim/status/1864065443528351892
Nope, Labour is near done already, its best hope is scraping home in a hung parliament propped up by the LDs.
If Farage eats further into the white working class Labour vote however Labour is done and he could even enter government in a deal with Badenoch who has made some gains on the latest polls with middle class voters who voted Labour in July
After.enjoying the initial relief from the Twitter sewer, I'm finding Bluesky beginning to grate a little. There tends to be somewhat of a surfeit of self-important young students who believe they've got eveything sussed.
1 - The number mentioned was 500% of Spanish consumption. That is the same as electricity used by perhaps France, UK, Italy and most of Germany (ballpark). That claim is overegged.
2 - Spain has more insolation than the UK, but it's not *that* much more. Maybe 40% more (1500 kWh/sqm, vs 1000-1100 for England over a year). Seasonal profiles are similar, so they can't do much for us in winter; they will need it themselves as output will fall by 80-90% over summer. That needs wind or other, or inter-seasonal storage - which was a 1990s dream now largely found wanting.
Spanish solar just does not address our core seasonal need profile.
3 - Winter is wind, tidal (if the dream can be scaled up) or other.
4 - We won't want to be more dependent on any country. We knew that was a bad idea, and Ukraine-Russia has driven it home - even more so eg for Germany-Italy than us. We are also getting a rapid lesson in long undersea cables, though just the first week of WW1 should have taught us that.
No country will now want to import a large % of their power, and will want generation distributed for security reasons.
5 - Main electricity export country for the next decades in Western Europe is likely to be France, as it has been for the last generation.
6 - We already have resilience connections in place for ~15% of our electricity demand in place, with more coming on stream.
7 - We have hundreds of square km of roofs that we have not even touched yet. Even in domestic solar, we have installs on only 3-5% or so of suitable house roofs. Plus mixed ag-solar farming methods are developing.
8 - If the marginal cost is very little, then we can just as easily put it here for security and transmission cost reasons.
9 - It remains that reducing usage is way ahead of building more power generation as a solution. And we have a huge way to go on that, too - even though we have come a long way. Just doing a new build house properly reduces heat energy demand by 80-90%, or 50-70% for a renovation over a poorly insulated one.
That'll do for a start.
Bluesky seems to be the place to be if a young American student who believes oneself to be immensely sophisticated, but in fact often shows signs of a very binary view if things, and Twitter is the place to be if you're a Trumpist mad loon.
The Reform Election Manifesto said:
"Commence Zero Tolerance Policing
Clampdown on all crime and antisocial behaviour.
Increase Stop and Search substantially.
Prison for violent crimes and possessing a knife.
Drug dealing and trafficking will get mandatory
life imprisonment. A new offence of Substantial
Possession of Drugs will meet heavy fines."
Add in immediate deportation of foreign criminals (who do not seem to benefit from his Christian forgiveness) and the inconsistency is clear.
I'm not sure what he has said about the Govt's emphasis on rehabilitation, and I would like to hear more from him on that so I can evaluate his argued case better.
Lefty Mark Steel wrote this a few days ago.
"But Bluesky’s selling point is that everyone on there is lovely and liberal, so it’s almost TOO full of kindness. I joined it this week and immediately people sent messages such as, “SO pleased you’ve joined us here in this heartwarming community of empathy. Wishing you love and warmth and hope your aural centres are fully aligned.” I think it needs some Trump supporters to make it seem a bit more wholesome."
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/mark-steel-calling-all-trump-supporters-we-need-you-on-bluesky-3406782
I see Farage and Tice not the Tories taking voters from Labour should they fail to rally in the next four years and you won't get a look in. Your party has lost their press, that should worry you.
"Tokyo Metro wins contract to operate London’s Elizabeth line
Consortium including company that runs Tokyo’s renowned metro system to take over from China’s MTR in May"
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/nov/20/tokyo-metro-wins-contract-operate-london-elizabeth-line
https://bsky.app/profile/benbartlett.bsky.social/post/3lcd6cod4j22o
“Income renewal? How? This tax rising government is already hitting growth, unemployment is rising again, inflation which Rishi was getting a grip on back up too. Not to mention its complete inability to control the boats. Nope, Labour is near done already”.
There was always going to be a big tax raising and public service spending budget whoever won the election. Inflation was always going to be back up this winter because of its link to energy price rises, regardless who won the election. The fact they didn’t go big for growth and income renewal straight away, letting more inflation out the bag, is to their credit. Early days on their policies for controlling the boats, though they are getting some surprisingly quick success on processing the Conservatives just couldn’t manage.
Are you seriously trying to convince me, May 3rd 2029, all that voters will remember is this autumns boat crossings and budget, not anything and everything between now and then? 🤦♀️
They have complete control of the machinery for nearly five years, at least 9 more budgets for the growth and renewal bits.
I’m the one who predicted the early election! in part because it would be a record summer for crossings, it annually shoots up from July. Look at you trying to use it against a newbie government, you concede how very much more potent the attack would have been against a long term incumbent, this surge from July? The channel crossings follow a heavy previous year of Europe filling up. I’m now predicting a mix of offshore processing and more quick return deals will change the “Europe filling up” picture across all Europe in coming years.
And you have to take into account how remembering happens in politics, details, reasoning, and fairness never comes into voters minds. Voters won’t remember the world post covid economic reboot sent inflation up everywhere, made worse by invasion of Ukraine meaning UK exposed to gas prices going up, going up due to European countries over reliance on Russian imports. No. Such honest details will be long gone. In 2029 and 2034, voters will remember inflation up and mortgages up because of stupid and incompetent Tory governments. And if inflation and mortgage costs have gone down and stayed low under Labour, you saying this won’t give Labour any General Election credibility and bounce?
The political history states, if voters feel better off May 3rd 2029 compared July 24, it will come with, help generate, a very poor view of last Conservative government.
Your post and its optimism comes across as trying to avoid known political realities of how this thing likely plays out. It might be Labour don’t do very well achieving their goals - but you cannot be so cocksure of this so early. If they do achieve those goals, eating into such a landslide will be such hard work.
You have to accept my view of this, because that’s how it always actually works.
On Monty, back in the day he was a social conservative wrt private life / more liberal wrt public life, following the values of the Centre for Social Justice - which iirc placed itself in the "Inspired by Wilberforce" type of tradition. I pin them as a more traditionalist fellow travellers with eg Michael Schluter (Keep Sunday Special / Relationship Foundation). And they worked on issues like developing Universal Credit and the work on Modern Slavery. At that time he was alongside IDS.
I'm not quite clear how he took (in my view) quite such a sharp turn right, as he got older. Influence of groups like Christian Concern and National Conservatives? Monty himself is imo too thoughtful to swallow the unalloyed Trumpvangelical lines.
@HYUFD may be able to advise?
For Reform, I have a sense that Richard Tice has something of the Christian Right about him - he uses the argot, for example "redemption" - "if someone makes a bad mistake in life, age 19, that there's no redemption they are doomed as a sinner forever?". That's quite technical, specialist language for someone to use if all he has is what is left over from school at age 60.
https://news.sky.com/story/politics-latest-reform-deputy-defends-remarkable-mp-who-was-jailed-for-assaulting-his-girlfriend-12593360
He was also present on at least one of the Iwerne (ie the Smyth ones that Welby resigned over) camps as a boy, which were aimed at encouraging potential societal leaders in evangelicalism.
https://youtu.be/ja-SyadpUJs?t=108
(Talk-TV - fair amount of ranting.)
I don't know his stance now. OTOH he handwaves away McMurdock's not having disclosed (ie lied about) his history of partner violence, and left his wife for Isobel Oakeshott. But he has a strong public life / private life split.
There's something there, that I have not got a detailed handle on yet. Someone needs to ask him if he was in the Christian Union when he was at Salford University.
AFAICS, with my MP being Reform, they have remarkably little to say.
I am not a fan of Severn (Cardiff-Weston) barrage (3GW) for a number of reasons.
https://x.com/NotFarLeftAtAll/status/1863589129549680688
Or maybe it's just that they're more likely to remember what the last Labour governments were actually like?
My daughter's nursery is also likely to be clobbered I think
Don't Panic Mr Mainwaring, Don't Panic
https://x.com/skynews/status/1864104958708109363?s=61
A Cardiff lagoon alone with two banks of turbines generates 3.2 GW. That requires 22km of sea wall, utilising a 9.7m average height between high and low tide.
It powers 1.4m homes.
There are only 1.35m homes in Wales.
Batteries will help smooth out power fluctuations for a few hours, to a few days. Great for eg night (in summer for solar) or when the wind isn't blowing (for wind).
What batteries won't do is smooth out seasons and that's my problem. We aren't going to be storing power from sunshine from July to be using in January.
For us to generate enough electricity to get us through midwinter from solar we're going to be needing to generate orders of magnitude more than we need in summer, because generation is going to be that right down in winter as demand surges.
Especially if we're moving to electric heating like heat pumps etc - the seasonal differential is already bad enough before that.
I think it improved for losing some of the self important types too.
https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/chancellor-admits-it-won-t-be-easy-for-business-to-absorb-costs-of-national-insurance-hike/ar-AA1vd5xs?ocid=entnewsntp&pc=U531&cvid=56638c3609804a30a65b0685b9f3e579&ei=16
By their tax and spend doom budget that has increased the cost of borrowing and will drive up mortgage rates, the Government have fully implicated themselves in the economic pain the country is experiencing - no way anyone will be buying the 'the other lot did it' argument four years from now. Even if the econony mounts an unprecedented comeback, they will not benefit electorally, just as the Tories failed to benefit in 1997 for their genuine economic comeback.
https://www.weforum.org/stories/2021/04/renewable-energy-storage-pumped-batteries-thermal-mechanical/
Massive away win for the little fella.
https://x.com/GeoffNorcott/status/1863578232487829963?t=C8Bop_UYstHuO0nlmR3HqQ&s=19
As for treasury yields, yes they have come down but they are still elevated from what they were in the summer so not necessarily cause for celebration.
The media does not do balance. It does sensationalism and short termism. Labour should have realised that seeing how the Tories were treated by it. Expecting the media to change tack due to the change in govt is naive.
On the reasonable assumption it wasn't complimentary, QTWTAIY.
It's also a bit sad.
This is some back-of-envelope calculations using day average consumption in 2024, so illustrative only:
Days self-sufficient, 2024
And then gas becomes what it probably ought to be for now- the backup that's easy to turn on and off for the two weeks a year where it's cold, cloudy and still.
And yes, that's also a problem that needs solving, but in the meantime, don't let the best be the enemy of the good.
I can't find anything reliable for battery storage currently in the planning process, but it's perhaps 100GWh? The government reckons we will need 200GWh by 2040. That makes it all look quite positive, but doesn't take into account the increase in EVs and heat pumps - the demand side.
NEW THREAD
So the Conservative message did not resonate. Where Rishi tried to make it exciting he just put off potential voters - Conscription for 18 year olds madness.
Also, they gave the impression that governing was trivial - it must be they were a bunch of wankers and they were managing to do it. Old farts like me and old wankers like me saying Labour in government will be a disaster cut little ice.
So we are where we are. So in many ways although the result in the opinion polls is as TSE says the cause is exactly the opposite. Labour policies were always going to be detrimental to the well being of the people I meet on a daily basis. On a scale of 1 to 10 how harmful, Blair hit 4, 5 or 6 generally. I expected Starmer to hit 6 or 7 regularly and I feared the IHT on farms and small businesses albeit on a rational basis with thresholds about twice what they are. However I did not expect this constant war against me, and on the scale of 1 to 10 they generally hit 15 or 16 out of 10.
Some will cheer this but it will keep Labour out of power for the rest of my life time, and for me at least that must be a good thing.
The real (natural) difference between the Conservatives and Reform is on the role/size of the state, and economic liberalism.
He is a Christian but not as hardline a social conservative as the former 3, he is mainly in Reform as he is a very rich small state Thatcherite and thinks the Tories too wet economically
Oh, wait…
That’s the nub of it. Economy will be better, voters will feel better off? But will this decide the 2029 election?
I’m arguing voters actually voted for that tax and spend budget for repair of public services. And in voters eyes, the Conservative Parties reputation for economic competence is now in the gutter. And both these is electorally fundamental.
That’s the point I’m making between narrative on one hand and how voters behave on the other. The reality is Conservatives have dug themselves into a General Election hole, and having lost the machinery they don’t have control over their own fate. But this reality isn’t coming across from a lot of PB posters.
At least in your post is the admittance HY won’t do, the comparison on economy performance likely will be there - but then you slipped away from reality by insisting it just won’t matter a jot. The weakness in your post was mentioning 1997 as reference point. I’d argue back, getting into voters minds, 97 came at end of a run, not the start of one. This is more like 1979 that led to 18 years before opposition was trusted with government again. And through those 4 election wins, trusting the incumbent with the economy, not trusting the opposition with the economy, was the base for the victory.
Governments take a lot of flak - it’s almost like being put in stocks, and those in stocks last week throw stuff with glee - but governments still come back and win the GE. Actually being in stocks taking flak does come with magic wands. This is reality fundamental of how general election electoral guff works. There’s an awful lot fools gold in polling and voting nights to come for the opposition parties between now and May 3rd 2029 - but the reality of general election electoral guff is already before us imo.
Obscure and and unread photos by someone on the odd-goings on in New Jersey , who does not appear to be your typical conspiracist extremist.
Unverifiable, but interesting anyway.
https://x.com/VintageArtCafe/status/1864695250280685578