He's using fixing foundations, repairing damp rot in a wall and using a hairdryer to cheat all in one sentence.
"Not fixing the roof while the sun was shining"
This little gem from the Cons in 2010 has much to answer for. The country is now seen as a house so politicians have to express things in those terms. If they don't the voters won't be able to grasp what's going on.
Eg the priorities for me, once the foundations and dry rot are sorted, are installing double glazing and a smart meter.
He's using fixing foundations, repairing damp rot in a wall and using a hairdryer to cheat all in one sentence.
"Not fixing the roof while the sun was shining"
This little gem from the Cons in 2010 has much to answer for. The country is now seen as a house so politicians have to express things in those terms. If they don't the voters won't be able to grasp what's going on.
Eg the priorities for me, once the foundations and dry rot are sorted, are installing double glazing and a smart meter.
Meanwhile over in the Russian empire Putin is building kitchen extensions and garden rooms, without planning permission. He’s a bit over-budget and behind schedule with his latest though.
One of the most irritating failings of the BBC Politics page (among many) is its seeming inability to ever say when a major political speech is taking place. Does anyone know when Sir Keir is standing up – and where I can watch it (assume BBC/Sky News channel)?
11am.
Thanks – appreciate the heads-up.
Out of interest, from where did you source that intel?
Now 11.15 accord to Sky
Okay thanks Big G. Hope you sort out your issue by the way – it's a horrible situation and one that is seemingly more commonplace than one might think.
Thank you and it is a very seriously widespread issue that needs firm action by GPs and Opticians
Presumably the idea is you don't want GPs enforcing this because it damages the GP/patient relationship and might put people off seeing their GP. You want GPs to be carers, not policemen.
Given such an intervention by the GP could save the life of their patient and others, they need to step in. The anecdotal evidence is that they are often unwilling to do. Even when the patient has dementia!
There is a culture of pearl-clutching and absence of personal responsibility. If you have an elderly relative who is clearly unfit to drive and a danger to others, there is no doubt in my mind that you have a moral duty to remove that danger.
If the GP, police or DVLA don't do anything about it, then it's up to you. Best way would be to hide the keys, take it to the mechanic and have it disabled or some similar scheme. Online forums have hundreds of cases of people being forced to do stuff like this.
Ah yes, stealing the keys/car of another i.e. committing a crime. I'm sure many on here have pondered it – but to suggest that it's an advisable course of action is something of a stretch.
and a defence of necessity is a legal defence in criminal law.
One of the most irritating failings of the BBC Politics page (among many) is its seeming inability to ever say when a major political speech is taking place. Does anyone know when Sir Keir is standing up – and where I can watch it (assume BBC/Sky News channel)?
11am.
Thanks – appreciate the heads-up.
Out of interest, from where did you source that intel?
Now 11.15 accord to Sky
Okay thanks Big G. Hope you sort out your issue by the way – it's a horrible situation and one that is seemingly more commonplace than one might think.
Thank you and it is a very seriously widespread issue that needs firm action by GPs and Opticians
Presumably the idea is you don't want GPs enforcing this because it damages the GP/patient relationship and might put people off seeing their GP. You want GPs to be carers, not policemen.
Given such an intervention by the GP could save the life of their patient and others, they need to step in. The anecdotal evidence is that they are often unwilling to do. Even when the patient has dementia!
I thought it was a legal requirement for a GP to inform DVLA if a patient is driving when unfit
No, a GP should consider it - but they won't necessarily come into contact with all factors as a matter of course.
It's self-report, or police intervention. My mum stopped at 7x when a 6ft PCSO turned up on the doorstep after a third-party report (and she got a bit traumatised) from someone (would not identify even if the witness was credible) who had followed her for 5 miles in his car, allegedly. Imo the PCSO failed to show that the third party report was credible - she stopped anyway; I was not happy.
I think DVLA can ask for medical advice - certainly this is the case in medical licenses. One of my abiding terrors is that a computer will get something wrong due to a typo or similar, and it will take months to get my suspended license back if it happens to me wrt my 3-yr medical driving licence.
The reporting of #porridgegate has been atrocious. You expect it of the tabloids, but Radio 4 Today were at it saying porridge had been labelled unhealthy.
Quaker Rolled Oats - 1g of sugar per 100g
Quaker Golden Syrup Oats - 15g per 100g
The latter’s ads are banned, the first are not.
I don’t think the reporters are too stupid the know the difference, so it’s obviously a confected story for the sake of a cheap headline. A bit bloody pathetic really. https://x.com/DBanksy/status/1864297916883521973
Next up, oatcakes named as unhealthy!
What’s that you say, Hobnobs? They both contain oats don’t they?!
Tom Harwood @tomhfh · 55s Starmer cites the bonkers £100m bat tunnel as example of blockage in economy, driving up taxes and the cost of living - but will his government cancel it?
Haigh told me she wouldn’t cancel it three weeks ago.
One of the most irritating failings of the BBC Politics page (among many) is its seeming inability to ever say when a major political speech is taking place. Does anyone know when Sir Keir is standing up – and where I can watch it (assume BBC/Sky News channel)?
11am.
Thanks – appreciate the heads-up.
Out of interest, from where did you source that intel?
Now 11.15 accord to Sky
Okay thanks Big G. Hope you sort out your issue by the way – it's a horrible situation and one that is seemingly more commonplace than one might think.
Thank you and it is a very seriously widespread issue that needs firm action by GPs and Opticians
Presumably the idea is you don't want GPs enforcing this because it damages the GP/patient relationship and might put people off seeing their GP. You want GPs to be carers, not policemen.
Given such an intervention by the GP could save the life of their patient and others, they need to step in. The anecdotal evidence is that they are often unwilling to do. Even when the patient has dementia!
There is a culture of pearl-clutching and absence of personal responsibility. If you have an elderly relative who is clearly unfit to drive and a danger to others, there is no doubt in my mind that you have a moral duty to remove that danger.
If the GP, police or DVLA don't do anything about it, then it's up to you. Best way would be to hide the keys, take it to the mechanic and have it disabled or some similar scheme. Online forums have hundreds of cases of people being forced to do stuff like this.
Ah yes, stealing the keys/car of another i.e. committing a crime. I'm sure many on here have pondered it – but to suggest that it's an advisable course of action is something of a stretch.
It is. I'm sorry, but if your relative kills someone on the road then you've commited a far graver crime, whatever the law says.
Matthew Parris is in decent form today defending FPTP in today's Speccie. He is right. (Government requires decisions between binary choices, so coalition isn't capable of producing a proper government programme).
Despite all evidence to the contrary.
Just the regurgitation of old prejudice.
And the idea that government decisions are binary choices is self evident nonsense.
Has Parris been asleep for the past 14 years? You might have made that argument in 2010, with no recent experience of coalitions and following a string of governments that mostly knew what they were about, even if you didn't agree with them. The best argument against FPTP is the governments it has produced since 2015.
As an aside, why is it called First Past the Post? There is no post! E.g. in Exmouth and Exeter East the "winning" candidate polled just 28.7% of the vote, and other similarly low examples are available. In many other seats 40% is a losing score. If anything AV should be called First Past the Post as it requires a candidate to go past the post of 50%. FPTP needs to be called Most Popular Candidate - MPC - or something like that. (Or Least Unpopular?)
Indeed. This has been remarked on before. The Americans call it Winner Takes All, which is perhaps a better name.
What produced a particularly disproportionate result at the last election was the extent of anti-Tory tactical voting. There would still have been a strong element of that effect under AV.
We are getting a problem with anonymity on this website and several others as well. In 2005 it was a good thing to allow people to comment but now there just seem to be duty grifters who post comments as if are paid be the hour or the day. We need to have a discussion, would it be better if people were only allowed to post under their names ? I was outed in 2008 BTW
Can anyone report someone they think is unfit to drive to the DVLA or does it HAVE to be a/their medical professional (or themselves) ?
Anyone can, but it's toothless unless the GP certifies them unfit. Which, in my experience, they are unwilling to do – even when the driver has dementia. Essentially the burden of proof is on the complainant... you have to somehow 'prove' that they are unfit (rather than the driver prove that they are fit!).
Do you know what has happened in this case? Has the DVLA responded to the complaint by contacting the GP and the GP has replied that the person is fit? Or has the DVLA just not done anything with the complaint, and the GP meanwhile has also not proactively done anything?
He's using fixing foundations, repairing damp rot in a wall and using a hairdryer to cheat all in one sentence.
"Not fixing the roof while the sun was shining"
This little gem from the Cons in 2010 has much to answer for. The country is now seen as a house so politicians have to express things in those terms. If they don't the voters won't be able to grasp what's going on.
Eg the priorities for me, once the foundations and dry rot are sorted, are installing double glazing and a smart meter.
Meanwhile over in the Russian empire Putin is building kitchen extensions and garden rooms, without planning permission. He’s a bit over-budget and behind schedule with his latest though.
More like driving a bulldozer into the side of his neighbour's house.
If you disagree with someone, discuss it via a comment, rather than hiding behind the anonymity of the flag.
Can we remove it and also not allow members to use the private option to hide their previous posts. If you post it own it or retract it. It's a very useful facility and there is nothing private being protected.
Now some shite questions from Chris Mason and Natasha Clark.
What is Chris Mason for?
All BBC political editors since Nick Robinson exist to remind us that Nick Robinson was really good at his job.
Only in the sense that all interviewers since Jeremy Paxman exist to remind us that Jeremy Paxman was really good at his job. People who came after them try to copy their style and it doesn't work.
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
"Too many people in Whitehall are comfortable in the tepid bath of managed decline."
That sounds like PB's Luckyguy.
Me, I think "managed decline" is one of the most lazy and misunderstood terms on the block. It's tossed around as an insult signifying mediocrity and lack of ambition when in fact it's very hard to achieve and ought to be thought of as a stretch target.
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
OK, but this is not really a grown up approach. What all this 6 KPIs sort of stuff evades is important.
The state/government over the years takes overall control of a vast panoply of important bits of society, together with an unlimited power of taxation and a huge centralised infrastructure. Its position is obviously unique.
When I go to Tesco, a tiny operation by comparison, I don't ask it to be excellent in bananas, basmati rice, stilton, dry sherry, toothbrushes and cocoa; I ask it to be very good, very competent and often excellent at everything within its domain. And it is.
So, on the same basis, I ask the state/government at all levels to be very good, very competent and often excellent at everything - that vast and widespread domain - which by law it has taken to itself and taken out of my hands. From the efficacy of our nuclear deterrent to the issuing of a driving licence.
We have come to think this is an outrageous and unreasonable expectation. It isn't.
We are getting a problem with anonymity on this website and several others as well. In 2005 it was a good thing to allow people to comment but now there just seem to be duty grifters who post comments as if are paid be the hour or the day. We need to have a discussion, would it be better if people were only allowed to post under their names ? I was outed in 2008 BTW
I can't see what it would achieve if anonymous astroturfers were forced to be more imaginative in creating false names. One imagines now it is mainly Russians and trolls doing so for their own amusement, rather than the dog days of New Labour when it seemed like everyone in CCHQ was posting here.
One of the most irritating failings of the BBC Politics page (among many) is its seeming inability to ever say when a major political speech is taking place. Does anyone know when Sir Keir is standing up – and where I can watch it (assume BBC/Sky News channel)?
11am.
Thanks – appreciate the heads-up.
Out of interest, from where did you source that intel?
Now 11.15 accord to Sky
Okay thanks Big G. Hope you sort out your issue by the way – it's a horrible situation and one that is seemingly more commonplace than one might think.
Thank you and it is a very seriously widespread issue that needs firm action by GPs and Opticians
Presumably the idea is you don't want GPs enforcing this because it damages the GP/patient relationship and might put people off seeing their GP. You want GPs to be carers, not policemen.
Given such an intervention by the GP could save the life of their patient and others, they need to step in. The anecdotal evidence is that they are often unwilling to do. Even when the patient has dementia!
I thought it was a legal requirement for a GP to inform DVLA if a patient is driving when unfit
No, a GP should consider it - but they won't necessarily come into contact with all factors as a matter of course.
It's self-report, or police intervention. My mum stopped at 7x when a 6ft PCSO turned up on the doorstep after a third-party report (and she got a bit traumatised) from someone (would not identify even if the witness was credible) who had followed her for 5 miles in his car, allegedly. Imo the PCSO failed to show that the third party report was credible - she stopped anyway; I was not happy.
I think DVLA can ask for medical advice - certainly this is the case in medical licenses. One of my abiding terrors is that a computer will get something wrong due to a typo or similar, and it will take months to get my suspended license back if it happens to me wrt my 3-yr medical driving licence.
It is more an issue for an Optician than a doctor. I notice at Specsavers, at any age, and I assume their competitors when they do an eye test they are catagorical as to whether your visual imperfection diminishes your ability to pass the sight condition. It is obvious that they MUST do that, otherwise an aggrieved victim could sue them for any resultant accident. I have been surprised that no victim has ever taken that route.
A doctor would be more like a priest in the confessional and would be on shakey ground.
Now some shite questions from Chris Mason and Natasha Clark.
What is Chris Mason for?
All BBC political editors since Nick Robinson exist to remind us that Nick Robinson was really good at his job.
Only in the sense that all interviewers since Jeremy Paxman exist to remind us that Jeremy Paxman was really good at his job. People who came after them try to copy their style and it doesn't work.
Starmer has had the better of these useless journos. A crap speech recovered by even worse questioning.
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
Ooh, just reminded me, I need to submit a generator reading and photo of my meter
To be honest I am not sure why he even bothered with this conference
Clear objectives
Clear targets
Clear plans
Clearly you have absolutely nothing constructive or relevant to say.
The majority of the electorate will welcome clarity.
The majority of the electorate will feel free to make judgement on the progress.
Those who are so blinkered as to pass judgement before Labour even took office are those who were wetting their pants on here on the 3rd July trying to convince themselves that The Tories were going to win 300 seats.
There is nothing more pointless than a blinkered mind
Matthew Parris is in decent form today defending FPTP in today's Speccie. He is right. (Government requires decisions between binary choices, so coalition isn't capable of producing a proper government programme).
Despite all evidence to the contrary.
Just the regurgitation of old prejudice.
And the idea that government decisions are binary choices is self evident nonsense.
Has Parris been asleep for the past 14 years? You might have made that argument in 2010, with no recent experience of coalitions and following a string of governments that mostly knew what they were about, even if you didn't agree with them. The best argument against FPTP is the governments it has produced since 2015.
As an aside, why is it called First Past the Post? There is no post! E.g. in Exmouth and Exeter East the "winning" candidate polled just 28.7% of the vote, and other similarly low examples are available. In many other seats 40% is a losing score. If anything AV should be called First Past the Post as it requires a candidate to go past the post of 50%. FPTP needs to be called Most Popular Candidate - MPC - or something like that. (Or Least Unpopular?)
There is a post. It's the 50% post. Relevant in 2 party systems like the 19th century in Britain.
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
I suppose that makes a change from Greens deciding the solar farm is actually about Palestine.
Olivia remains the most popular baby name for girls. Mohammed (and derivations thereof) replaces Noah as the most popular baby name for boys.
Your eternal reminder that the reason that Mohammed is so popular as a boys name is not Hordes Of Muslamics, but is caused by a lack of imagination. So you get a spike in a huge sea of names.
To be honest I am not sure why he even bothered with this conference
Clear objectives
Clear targets
Clear plans
Clearly you have absolutely nothing constructive or relevant to say.
The majority of the electorate will welcome clarity.
The majority of the electorate will feel free to make judgement on the progress.
Those who are so blinkered as to pass judgement before Labour even took office are those who were wetting their pants on here on the 3rd July trying to convince themselves that The Tories were going to win 300 seats.
There is nothing more pointless than a blinkered mind
Your last sentence is a perfect comment on your own posts
What produced a particularly disproportionate result at the last election was the extent of anti-Tory tactical voting. There would still have been a strong element of that effect under AV.
When one party is particularly unpopular, AV tends towards even less proportional results than WTA, since the second preferences of third and fourth party voters tend to swing along with those casting votes for one of the top two.
Matthew Parris is in decent form today defending FPTP in today's Speccie. He is right. (Government requires decisions between binary choices, so coalition isn't capable of producing a proper government programme).
Despite all evidence to the contrary.
Just the regurgitation of old prejudice.
Indeed. Our current government seems to be struggling to come up with a coherent programme despite having a whacking great majority. Its predecessor was also rubbish at doing the same thing.
I think it's just another example of reasoning backwards from a conclusion already determined.
What is indisputable is the undemocratic nature of FPTP. The attempt to demonstrate which form of voting provides more efficient government is just BS, in my opinion.
"The attempt to demonstrate which form of voting provides more efficient government is just BS, in my opinion."
Surely you'd accept that considering the outcomes of a system is critical in determining whether a system is better or worse than alternatives?
Never mind the practice - does it work in theory? !
A philosopher once wrote: "In the real world, theory is merely a tool for practicality."
Yogi Berra said “In theory there is no difference between theory and practice - in practice there is”
One of the most irritating failings of the BBC Politics page (among many) is its seeming inability to ever say when a major political speech is taking place. Does anyone know when Sir Keir is standing up – and where I can watch it (assume BBC/Sky News channel)?
11am.
Thanks – appreciate the heads-up.
Out of interest, from where did you source that intel?
Now 11.15 accord to Sky
Okay thanks Big G. Hope you sort out your issue by the way – it's a horrible situation and one that is seemingly more commonplace than one might think.
Thank you and it is a very seriously widespread issue that needs firm action by GPs and Opticians
Presumably the idea is you don't want GPs enforcing this because it damages the GP/patient relationship and might put people off seeing their GP. You want GPs to be carers, not policemen.
Given such an intervention by the GP could save the life of their patient and others, they need to step in. The anecdotal evidence is that they are often unwilling to do. Even when the patient has dementia!
I thought it was a legal requirement for a GP to inform DVLA if a patient is driving when unfit
No, a GP should consider it - but they won't necessarily come into contact with all factors as a matter of course.
It's self-report, or police intervention. My mum stopped at 7x when a 6ft PCSO turned up on the doorstep after a third-party report (and she got a bit traumatised) from someone (would not identify even if the witness was credible) who had followed her for 5 miles in his car, allegedly. Imo the PCSO failed to show that the third party report was credible - she stopped anyway; I was not happy.
I think DVLA can ask for medical advice - certainly this is the case in medical licenses. One of my abiding terrors is that a computer will get something wrong due to a typo or similar, and it will take months to get my suspended license back if it happens to me wrt my 3-yr medical driving licence.
It is more an issue for an Optician than a doctor. I notice at Specsavers, at any age, and I assume their competitors when they do an eye test they are catagorical as to whether your visual imperfection diminishes your ability to pass the sight condition. It is obvious that they MUST do that, otherwise an aggrieved victim could sue them for any resultant accident. I have been surprised that no victim has ever taken that route.
A doctor would be more like a priest in the confessional and would be on shakey ground.
It's not that clear cut afaics. The Guidance from the General Optical Council is here:
FPTP only really works when you have a two-party system. Two-party politics produces Trump. Voters did not like the current administration, so voted for the other party, leaving the US with the most unsuitable person to be President since Andrew Johnson.
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
I suppose that makes a change from Greens deciding the solar farm is actually about Palestine.
It is the next battle - and one that may well come in this parliament. If prices of solar plus batteries continue to drop, any fool with a bit of land will be able to create leecy. Cheaply and with very little maintenance costs.
Remember "Too cheap to meter", for nuclear power? Well, this one will almost certainly deliver. And you might well see contracts on the lines of "All the available power from this farm, up to capacity", for a fixed price.
At this point, the Hair Shirt Declinists will get involved. Their vision of the future doesn't include a renaissance in aluminium smelting etc. They are proud of declining electricity usage.
Olivia remains the most popular baby name for girls. Mohammed (and derivations thereof) replaces Noah as the most popular baby name for boys.
Olivia would come 8th in the boys names list, because generally people are more imaginative when it comes to girls names, but stick to safer names for boys.
If you disagree with someone, discuss it via a comment, rather than hiding behind the anonymity of the flag.
Can we remove it and also not allow members to use the private option to hide their previous posts. If you post it own it or retract it. It's a very useful facility and there is nothing private being protected.
Yes, I'm not a big fan of that "private" option. I fear it's becoming a way for posters to self-announce as VIPs. But the ethos here is that apart from the blog managers there are no VIPs. Or rather we all are.
One of the most irritating failings of the BBC Politics page (among many) is its seeming inability to ever say when a major political speech is taking place. Does anyone know when Sir Keir is standing up – and where I can watch it (assume BBC/Sky News channel)?
11am.
Thanks – appreciate the heads-up.
Out of interest, from where did you source that intel?
Now 11.15 accord to Sky
Okay thanks Big G. Hope you sort out your issue by the way – it's a horrible situation and one that is seemingly more commonplace than one might think.
Thank you and it is a very seriously widespread issue that needs firm action by GPs and Opticians
Presumably the idea is you don't want GPs enforcing this because it damages the GP/patient relationship and might put people off seeing their GP. You want GPs to be carers, not policemen.
Given such an intervention by the GP could save the life of their patient and others, they need to step in. The anecdotal evidence is that they are often unwilling to do. Even when the patient has dementia!
I thought it was a legal requirement for a GP to inform DVLA if a patient is driving when unfit
No, a GP should consider it - but they won't necessarily come into contact with all factors as a matter of course.
It's self-report, or police intervention. My mum stopped at 7x when a 6ft PCSO turned up on the doorstep after a third-party report (and she got a bit traumatised) from someone (would not identify even if the witness was credible) who had followed her for 5 miles in his car, allegedly. Imo the PCSO failed to show that the third party report was credible - she stopped anyway; I was not happy.
I think DVLA can ask for medical advice - certainly this is the case in medical licenses. One of my abiding terrors is that a computer will get something wrong due to a typo or similar, and it will take months to get my suspended license back if it happens to me wrt my 3-yr medical driving licence.
The DVLA have twice told me that they may ask for medical advice, each time both from my GP and from the surgeon who operated on me. The former has told me that something 'it looked like it to her, but I should see the Assessment Centre'. The latter said, IIRC, that he didn't know and couldn't help.
To be honest I am not sure why he even bothered with this conference
Clear objectives
Clear targets
Clear plans
Clearly you have absolutely nothing constructive or relevant to say.
The majority of the electorate will welcome clarity.
The majority of the electorate will feel free to make judgement on the progress.
Those who are so blinkered as to pass judgement before Labour even took office are those who were wetting their pants on here on the 3rd July trying to convince themselves that The Tories were going to win 300 seats.
There is nothing more pointless than a blinkered mind
Aren’t we facing a war with Elon Musk? Starmer seems to have no position on it.
What is his plan to close the missile gap so we can take out Musk’s satellites?
Olivia remains the most popular baby name for girls. Mohammed (and derivations thereof) replaces Noah as the most popular baby name for boys.
Olivia would come 8th in the boys names list, because generally people are more imaginative when it comes to girls names, but stick to safer names for boys.
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
It’s almost as if what they say they want isn’t what they actually want.
Same as going from being all in favour of electric cars to now raising arguments about congestion and tyre particles, as it appears that affordable electric cars might actually happen.
To be honest I am not sure why he even bothered with this conference
Trying to turn the page on the fixing of foundations.
Or something like that...
The impression it gives is that Lab still haven't got any detail to back up their plans and so are now asking the Civil Service to work out how to meet the targets they just set.
Olivia remains the most popular baby name for girls. Mohammed (and derivations thereof) replaces Noah as the most popular baby name for boys.
Olivia would come 8th in the boys names list, because generally people are more imaginative when it comes to girls names, but stick to safer names for boys.
To be honest I am not sure why he even bothered with this conference
Clear objectives
Clear targets
Clear plans
Clearly you have absolutely nothing constructive or relevant to say.
The majority of the electorate will welcome clarity.
The majority of the electorate will feel free to make judgement on the progress.
Those who are so blinkered as to pass judgement before Labour even took office are those who were wetting their pants on here on the 3rd July trying to convince themselves that The Tories were going to win 300 seats.
There is nothing more pointless than a blinkered mind
Are the targets the right targets for the defined missions?
For example in health the mission appears to focus on community, tech, prevention.
Olivia remains the most popular baby name for girls. Mohammed (and derivations thereof) replaces Noah as the most popular baby name for boys.
Olivia would come 8th in the boys names list, because generally people are more imaginative when it comes to girls names, but stick to safer names for boys.
Why is Theodore in the top 10 for boys?
After the character in Werewolf by Night, the MCU “special presentation”?
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
Ooh, just reminded me, I need to submit a generator reading and photo of my meter
My most local farmer has quite steep, north facing terroir, which is a downer.
Olivia remains the most popular baby name for girls. Mohammed (and derivations thereof) replaces Noah as the most popular baby name for boys.
Olivia would come 8th in the boys names list, because generally people are more imaginative when it comes to girls names, but stick to safer names for boys.
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
I suppose that makes a change from Greens deciding the solar farm is actually about Palestine.
It is the next battle - and one that may well come in this parliament. If prices of solar plus batteries continue to drop, any fool with a bit of land will be able to create leecy. Cheaply and with very little maintenance costs.
Remember "Too cheap to meter", for nuclear power? Well, this one will almost certainly deliver. And you might well see contracts on the lines of "All the available power from this farm, up to capacity", for a fixed price.
At this point, the Hair Shirt Declinists will get involved. Their vision of the future doesn't include a renaissance in aluminium smelting etc. They are proud of declining electricity usage.
They are tw@ts who should be instructed to desist, in uncompromising terms.
I am not sure the NI changes were wise, but tumbling Dyson's and Clarkson's inheritance tax avoidance game is fine by me.
Dyson creates wealth Reeves doesnt. Who should we listen to ?
Dyson creates wealth in... Malaysia.
Reeves destroys wealth in Britain
Christ on a bike. Do you have a selection of dumb posts that you can easily select to slag off Reeves.
My earlier post was not uncritical but all yours are a not a particularly imaginative version of "Reeves is shit".
Anyway I'm off to work. I can't spend all day with all you job seeker claimants.
"Reeves is shit" Im glad to see youre coming round to my point of view
You'd save everyone a lot of reading time if you just posted "Reeves is shit" every post. Your posts generally say nothing more, so that saves both you and us time.
The other advantage for him is that such a posting does not require punctuation, which he “can’t be arsed” to do. Trebles all round!
R E E V E S
Is there a Nobel Prize for economics? Surely some sort of recognition is due for Reeves' long career successfully at the helm of the likes of RBS and the Bank of England, navigating them through the torrid squalls of the credit crunch and Covid-19, then joining the Government in time to revive the British economy from its under-taxed, under-regulated doldrums.
One to ponder.
The Reeves is shit narrative is posted on here a hundred times a day. Ninety of them from @Alanbrooke. You may well all be correct. However, why were none of you alarmed when Hunt cut NI twice in an unfunded election bribe? Surely the most egregious dereliction of duty by a Chancellor for generations.
No.
As I have said until I am blue in the face, there is more to an economy than handing in your homework and it all theoretically 'adding up'. There is consumer confidence affecting shopping habits. There is business confidence affecting investment and employment. There is investor confidence affecting borrowing costs. There is the mobile nature of both businesses and wealthy individuals. You can say that Hunt could never have made his proposed cuts to the public sector and balanced his books but
a) You have no idea if that is true. Reeves has done nothing about the burgeoning cost of public sector salaries or pensions (quite the reverse) nor addressed crippling welfare costs, exemplified by 'sickness influencers' who tell their followers how to get the most sick pay, nor done anything about the costs of the immigration system - quite the reverse.
b) The economy was gradually returning to growth under the Tories before the current deatheaters got in. Lord knows I was not a fan of Hunt Sunak, they were treading water, but it is clear that growth would have been stronger under Hunt than it is now, having a significant affect on tax receipts and possibly the cost of borrowing, giving him more headroom.
Yes but you supported Kwarteng's budget. That makes you wholly unqualified to propose a growth strategy.
Bollocks. Kwarteng's budget was never implemented. If it had been implemented and had failed, your argument might have a leg.
Olivia remains the most popular baby name for girls. Mohammed (and derivations thereof) replaces Noah as the most popular baby name for boys.
Olivia would come 8th in the boys names list, because generally people are more imaginative when it comes to girls names, but stick to safer names for boys.
Why is Theodore in the top 10 for boys?
Because Ted?
I thought Ted was mainly short for Edward?
Could be 'Theo' people want to nickname their babies? Not great.
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
I suppose that makes a change from Greens deciding the solar farm is actually about Palestine.
It is the next battle - and one that may well come in this parliament. If prices of solar plus batteries continue to drop, any fool with a bit of land will be able to create leecy. Cheaply and with very little maintenance costs.
Remember "Too cheap to meter", for nuclear power? Well, this one will almost certainly deliver. And you might well see contracts on the lines of "All the available power from this farm, up to capacity", for a fixed price.
At this point, the Hair Shirt Declinists will get involved. Their vision of the future doesn't include a renaissance in aluminium smelting etc. They are proud of declining electricity usage.
They are tw@ts who should be instructed to desist, in uncompromising terms.
It's partly about instincts and partly about those who want a Scarcity Society. With *them* in charge of the rationing.
Olivia remains the most popular baby name for girls. Mohammed (and derivations thereof) replaces Noah as the most popular baby name for boys.
Your eternal reminder that the reason that Mohammed is so popular as a boys name is not Hordes Of Muslamics, but is caused by a lack of imagination. So you get a spike in a huge sea of names.
Also the various ways of Spelling the name too all count as one.
There were three boys called "Thatcher" as their first name in 2023.
Fathers (or mothers) cider drinkers?
My Thai friend named her daughter Snooker, because when she phoned her husband to say she was going into labour, he said he was in the middle of a game and would come when he'd finished. So she told him her daughter would be named to remind him of the thing that obviously mattered to him the most. They are no longer together, surprisingly.
To be honest I am not sure why he even bothered with this conference
Clear objectives
Clear targets
Clear plans
Clearly you have absolutely nothing constructive or relevant to say.
The majority of the electorate will welcome clarity.
The majority of the electorate will feel free to make judgement on the progress.
Those who are so blinkered as to pass judgement before Labour even took office are those who were wetting their pants on here on the 3rd July trying to convince themselves that The Tories were going to win 300 seats.
There is nothing more pointless than a blinkered mind
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
I suppose that makes a change from Greens deciding the solar farm is actually about Palestine.
It is the next battle - and one that may well come in this parliament. If prices of solar plus batteries continue to drop, any fool with a bit of land will be able to create leecy. Cheaply and with very little maintenance costs.
Remember "Too cheap to meter", for nuclear power? Well, this one will almost certainly deliver. And you might well see contracts on the lines of "All the available power from this farm, up to capacity", for a fixed price.
At this point, the Hair Shirt Declinists will get involved. Their vision of the future doesn't include a renaissance in aluminium smelting etc. They are proud of declining electricity usage.
They are tw@ts who should be instructed to desist, in uncompromising terms.
It's partly about instincts and partly about those who want a Scarcity Society. With *them* in charge of the rationing.
Energy use correlates (though not 1:1) with economic growth. Energy produced a zero marginal cost (which is true of solar, at a first approximation) represents a huge economic boon.
If idiots want to go round in hair shirts, let them. In return, they can stop interfering in our lives.
To be honest I am not sure why he even bothered with this conference
Clear objectives
Clear targets
Clear plans
Clearly you have absolutely nothing constructive or relevant to say.
The majority of the electorate will welcome clarity.
The majority of the electorate will feel free to make judgement on the progress.
Those who are so blinkered as to pass judgement before Labour even took office are those who were wetting their pants on here on the 3rd July trying to convince themselves that The Tories were going to win 300 seats.
There is nothing more pointless than a blinkered mind
I am not sure the NI changes were wise, but tumbling Dyson's and Clarkson's inheritance tax avoidance game is fine by me.
Dyson creates wealth Reeves doesnt. Who should we listen to ?
Dyson creates wealth in... Malaysia.
Reeves destroys wealth in Britain
Christ on a bike. Do you have a selection of dumb posts that you can easily select to slag off Reeves.
My earlier post was not uncritical but all yours are a not a particularly imaginative version of "Reeves is shit".
Anyway I'm off to work. I can't spend all day with all you job seeker claimants.
"Reeves is shit" Im glad to see youre coming round to my point of view
You'd save everyone a lot of reading time if you just posted "Reeves is shit" every post. Your posts generally say nothing more, so that saves both you and us time.
The other advantage for him is that such a posting does not require punctuation, which he “can’t be arsed” to do. Trebles all round!
R E E V E S
Is there a Nobel Prize for economics? Surely some sort of recognition is due for Reeves' long career successfully at the helm of the likes of RBS and the Bank of England, navigating them through the torrid squalls of the credit crunch and Covid-19, then joining the Government in time to revive the British economy from its under-taxed, under-regulated doldrums.
One to ponder.
The Reeves is shit narrative is posted on here a hundred times a day. Ninety of them from @Alanbrooke. You may well all be correct. However, why were none of you alarmed when Hunt cut NI twice in an unfunded election bribe? Surely the most egregious dereliction of duty by a Chancellor for generations.
No.
As I have said until I am blue in the face, there is more to an economy than handing in your homework and it all theoretically 'adding up'. There is consumer confidence affecting shopping habits. There is business confidence affecting investment and employment. There is investor confidence affecting borrowing costs. There is the mobile nature of both businesses and wealthy individuals. You can say that Hunt could never have made his proposed cuts to the public sector and balanced his books but
a) You have no idea if that is true. Reeves has done nothing about the burgeoning cost of public sector salaries or pensions (quite the reverse) nor addressed crippling welfare costs, exemplified by 'sickness influencers' who tell their followers how to get the most sick pay, nor done anything about the costs of the immigration system - quite the reverse.
b) The economy was gradually returning to growth under the Tories before the current deatheaters got in. Lord knows I was not a fan of Hunt Sunak, they were treading water, but it is clear that growth would have been stronger under Hunt than it is now, having a significant affect on tax receipts and possibly the cost of borrowing, giving him more headroom.
Yes but you supported Kwarteng's budget. That makes you wholly unqualified to propose a growth strategy.
Bollocks. Kwarteng's budget was never implemented. If it had been implemented and had failed, your argument might have a leg.
It crashed and burned on take off. The markets crashed it. It failed at birth.
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
I suppose that makes a change from Greens deciding the solar farm is actually about Palestine.
It is the next battle - and one that may well come in this parliament. If prices of solar plus batteries continue to drop, any fool with a bit of land will be able to create leecy. Cheaply and with very little maintenance costs.
Remember "Too cheap to meter", for nuclear power? Well, this one will almost certainly deliver. And you might well see contracts on the lines of "All the available power from this farm, up to capacity", for a fixed price.
At this point, the Hair Shirt Declinists will get involved. Their vision of the future doesn't include a renaissance in aluminium smelting etc. They are proud of declining electricity usage.
I am doubtful. I think they will move on to something else, forgetting that they were wrong about technology in the case of electricity. Quite possibly air travel or livestock farming will become more of a focus.
Do we have any information on what this "Reform, but Nigel won't tell me yet" upcoming announcement may be?
Is Bobby Jenrick leaving?
Or might it be ... whisper it quietly ... Boris? *
* That would put the (cat / rat / prat) amongst the pigeons.
Boris who is having to cancel events on his Australian tour because the Australians don't give a XXXX? That Boris?
Braverman has been quiet of late.
Yes. Except to pop up in the Telegraph and on the Speccie podcast to offer opinions on immigration not necessarily to the advantage of the outgoing Government.
To be honest I am not sure why he even bothered with this conference
Clear objectives
Clear targets
Clear plans
Clearly you have absolutely nothing constructive or relevant to say.
The majority of the electorate will welcome clarity.
The majority of the electorate will feel free to make judgement on the progress.
Those who are so blinkered as to pass judgement before Labour even took office are those who were wetting their pants on here on the 3rd July trying to convince themselves that The Tories were going to win 300 seats.
There is nothing more pointless than a blinkered mind
And not a single full stop in sight.
There were four.
At random. Its an odd thing, and I probably shouldn't pick it up, as it's waste of time, but a certain other poster has a similar issue.
I forgot to mention the other day, the Talk TV host made what was potentially quite an astute remark in his interview with Tim Montgomery. He argued that whilst Musk probably does agree with Trump about a lot, what he had actually done was to spot an underlying trend, put all his chips on the 'Trump' square, and win big. The same is perhaps true of Reform. Musk senses a trend, and he is aligning himself with who he sees as Britain's future PM.
I am not sure the NI changes were wise, but tumbling Dyson's and Clarkson's inheritance tax avoidance game is fine by me.
Dyson creates wealth Reeves doesnt. Who should we listen to ?
Dyson creates wealth in... Malaysia.
Reeves destroys wealth in Britain
Christ on a bike. Do you have a selection of dumb posts that you can easily select to slag off Reeves.
My earlier post was not uncritical but all yours are a not a particularly imaginative version of "Reeves is shit".
Anyway I'm off to work. I can't spend all day with all you job seeker claimants.
"Reeves is shit" Im glad to see youre coming round to my point of view
You'd save everyone a lot of reading time if you just posted "Reeves is shit" every post. Your posts generally say nothing more, so that saves both you and us time.
The other advantage for him is that such a posting does not require punctuation, which he “can’t be arsed” to do. Trebles all round!
R E E V E S
Is there a Nobel Prize for economics? Surely some sort of recognition is due for Reeves' long career successfully at the helm of the likes of RBS and the Bank of England, navigating them through the torrid squalls of the credit crunch and Covid-19, then joining the Government in time to revive the British economy from its under-taxed, under-regulated doldrums.
One to ponder.
The Reeves is shit narrative is posted on here a hundred times a day. Ninety of them from @Alanbrooke. You may well all be correct. However, why were none of you alarmed when Hunt cut NI twice in an unfunded election bribe? Surely the most egregious dereliction of duty by a Chancellor for generations.
No.
As I have said until I am blue in the face, there is more to an economy than handing in your homework and it all theoretically 'adding up'. There is consumer confidence affecting shopping habits. There is business confidence affecting investment and employment. There is investor confidence affecting borrowing costs. There is the mobile nature of both businesses and wealthy individuals. You can say that Hunt could never have made his proposed cuts to the public sector and balanced his books but
a) You have no idea if that is true. Reeves has done nothing about the burgeoning cost of public sector salaries or pensions (quite the reverse) nor addressed crippling welfare costs, exemplified by 'sickness influencers' who tell their followers how to get the most sick pay, nor done anything about the costs of the immigration system - quite the reverse.
b) The economy was gradually returning to growth under the Tories before the current deatheaters got in. Lord knows I was not a fan of Hunt Sunak, they were treading water, but it is clear that growth would have been stronger under Hunt than it is now, having a significant affect on tax receipts and possibly the cost of borrowing, giving him more headroom.
Yes but you supported Kwarteng's budget. That makes you wholly unqualified to propose a growth strategy.
Bollocks. Kwarteng's budget was never implemented. If it had been implemented and had failed, your argument might have a leg.
It crashed and burned on take off. The markets crashed it. It failed at birth.
You can use whatever hackneyed metaphor you like, it makes no difference. It is impossible to judge it as a formula for growth without the measures being implemented.
I forgot to mention the other day, the Talk TV host made what was potentially quite an astute remark in his interview with Tim Montgomery. He argued that whilst Musk probably does agree with Trump about a lot, what he had actually done was to spot an underlying trend, put all his chips on the 'Trump' square, and win big. The same is perhaps true of Reform. Musk senses a trend, and he is aligning himself with who he sees as Britain's future PM.
The interesting part of that statement is that Elon is a follower, not a leader.
The $44bn he spent getting Trump elected didn't actually change the result
Olivia remains the most popular baby name for girls. Mohammed (and derivations thereof) replaces Noah as the most popular baby name for boys.
Your eternal reminder that the reason that Mohammed is so popular as a boys name is not Hordes Of Muslamics, but is caused by a lack of imagination. So you get a spike in a huge sea of names.
That's how FPTP works: should we introduce AV or even PR?
Decarbonise the grid by 2030 is f*cking massive hostage to fortune frankly.
I guess though they can fudge it as the election will be in 2029.
Starmer can't win with some of you.
If he doesn't set targets, he's unambitious and has no plan.
If he does, he is creating "hostages to fortune".
There's ambitious and downright undeliverable.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
The problem is that there are many way to "meet" a simple target.
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
The plan is to decarbonise the grid, so that shouldn’t have a direct industry impact so long as prices are competitive - that’s the key thing where Ed needs to deliver on his cheap energy promise.
The chap I know who is running his family farm as a solar farm/small business park is getting some interesting comments from local councillors about his plan (after installing batteries to back the panels) to sell cheap leecy to the businesses in his old farm buildings.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
I suppose that makes a change from Greens deciding the solar farm is actually about Palestine.
It is the next battle - and one that may well come in this parliament. If prices of solar plus batteries continue to drop, any fool with a bit of land will be able to create leecy. Cheaply and with very little maintenance costs.
Remember "Too cheap to meter", for nuclear power? Well, this one will almost certainly deliver. And you might well see contracts on the lines of "All the available power from this farm, up to capacity", for a fixed price.
At this point, the Hair Shirt Declinists will get involved. Their vision of the future doesn't include a renaissance in aluminium smelting etc. They are proud of declining electricity usage.
They are tw@ts who should be instructed to desist, in uncompromising terms.
It's partly about instincts and partly about those who want a Scarcity Society. With *them* in charge of the rationing.
Energy use correlates (though not 1:1) with economic growth. Energy produced a zero marginal cost (which is true of solar, at a first approximation) represents a huge economic boon.
If idiots want to go round in hair shirts, let them. In return, they can stop interfering in our lives.
Energy price doesn't correlate with economic growth, though. While cheap solar energy will initially reduce the cost of electricty, consumption will inevitably rise in response and put a floor on energy prices. Consequently, fossil fuels will remain economical for a long time yet and, unless their use is restricted by some means, they will continue to be consumed to the detriment of the environment. That's why technology isn't the golden bullet everyone seems to think it is.
"The leader of the opposition thinks if you do a couple of shifts at McDonalds you can be working class, so if I keep coming back here (to Pinewood) I could be the next James Bond.
I am not sure the NI changes were wise, but tumbling Dyson's and Clarkson's inheritance tax avoidance game is fine by me.
Dyson creates wealth Reeves doesnt. Who should we listen to ?
Dyson creates wealth in... Malaysia.
Reeves destroys wealth in Britain
Christ on a bike. Do you have a selection of dumb posts that you can easily select to slag off Reeves.
My earlier post was not uncritical but all yours are a not a particularly imaginative version of "Reeves is shit".
Anyway I'm off to work. I can't spend all day with all you job seeker claimants.
"Reeves is shit" Im glad to see youre coming round to my point of view
You'd save everyone a lot of reading time if you just posted "Reeves is shit" every post. Your posts generally say nothing more, so that saves both you and us time.
The other advantage for him is that such a posting does not require punctuation, which he “can’t be arsed” to do. Trebles all round!
R E E V E S
Is there a Nobel Prize for economics? Surely some sort of recognition is due for Reeves' long career successfully at the helm of the likes of RBS and the Bank of England, navigating them through the torrid squalls of the credit crunch and Covid-19, then joining the Government in time to revive the British economy from its under-taxed, under-regulated doldrums.
One to ponder.
The Reeves is shit narrative is posted on here a hundred times a day. Ninety of them from @Alanbrooke. You may well all be correct. However, why were none of you alarmed when Hunt cut NI twice in an unfunded election bribe? Surely the most egregious dereliction of duty by a Chancellor for generations.
No.
As I have said until I am blue in the face, there is more to an economy than handing in your homework and it all theoretically 'adding up'. There is consumer confidence affecting shopping habits. There is business confidence affecting investment and employment. There is investor confidence affecting borrowing costs. There is the mobile nature of both businesses and wealthy individuals. You can say that Hunt could never have made his proposed cuts to the public sector and balanced his books but
a) You have no idea if that is true. Reeves has done nothing about the burgeoning cost of public sector salaries or pensions (quite the reverse) nor addressed crippling welfare costs, exemplified by 'sickness influencers' who tell their followers how to get the most sick pay, nor done anything about the costs of the immigration system - quite the reverse.
b) The economy was gradually returning to growth under the Tories before the current deatheaters got in. Lord knows I was not a fan of Hunt Sunak, they were treading water, but it is clear that growth would have been stronger under Hunt than it is now, having a significant affect on tax receipts and possibly the cost of borrowing, giving him more headroom.
Yes but you supported Kwarteng's budget. That makes you wholly unqualified to propose a growth strategy.
Bollocks. Kwarteng's budget was never implemented. If it had been implemented and had failed, your argument might have a leg.
It crashed and burned on take off. The markets crashed it. It failed at birth.
You can use whatever hackneyed metaphor you like, it makes no difference. It is impossible to judge it as a formula for growth without the measures being implemented.
One of the most irritating failings of the BBC Politics page (among many) is its seeming inability to ever say when a major political speech is taking place. Does anyone know when Sir Keir is standing up – and where I can watch it (assume BBC/Sky News channel)?
Yes, to widen the point it's often very easy to find waffle around political events and numbers (such as this speech is) but awkward to locate actual numbers. US election results are a case in point.
It's another example among many I could quote of the BBC quietly and slowly falling apart.
It has cut the market data section from its business page. Doesn't matter much in itself, and I can get the info I need easily elsewhere, but it was a cost costing act which no doubt saved little and lost users.
You can see it everywhere in the Beeb. It needs a complete revamp, and an acceptance that it cannot be all things to all people. Time for it to just stick to the knitting, and limit itself only to what it does well.
The BBC coverage of that health insurance boss who got shot in NYC made me laugh - 'motive is a mystery'.
Comments
I do like a nice simple target that is closely aligned to what needs to happen.
I suppose it depends what "decarbonise" means in detail. But I'll eat my hat if we are not still burning gas in 2030 to keep the lights on.
Don't get me wrong - I very environmental and this needs doing, it is just how you do it and the steps to get there.
This little gem from the Cons in 2010 has much to answer for. The country is now seen as a house so politicians have to express things in those terms. If they don't the voters won't be able to grasp what's going on.
Eg the priorities for me, once the foundations and dry rot are sorted, are installing double glazing and a smart meter.
Now some shite questions from Chris Mason, Beth Rigby* and Natasha Clark.
*A particularly stupid question from Beth Rigby.
It's self-report, or police intervention. My mum stopped at 7x when a 6ft PCSO turned up on the doorstep after a third-party report (and she got a bit traumatised) from someone (would not identify even if the witness was credible) who had followed her for 5 miles in his car, allegedly. Imo the PCSO failed to show that the third party report was credible - she stopped anyway; I was not happy.
I think DVLA can ask for medical advice - certainly this is the case in medical licenses. One of my abiding terrors is that a computer will get something wrong due to a typo or similar, and it will take months to get my suspended license back if it happens to me wrt my 3-yr medical driving licence.
What’s that you say, Hobnobs? They both contain oats don’t they?!
Tom Harwood
@tomhfh
·
55s
Starmer cites the bonkers £100m bat tunnel as example of blockage in economy, driving up taxes and the cost of living - but will his government cancel it?
Haigh told me she wouldn’t cancel it three weeks ago.
Will @Heidi_Labour step in and save us £100m?
For example, if we shut down whole areas of industry, then no carbon emissions. Just import from China.
Peston ( bizarrely )and Gibbon are asking better questions than the herd.
Me, I think "managed decline" is one of the most lazy and misunderstood terms on the block. It's tossed around as an insult signifying mediocrity and lack of ambition when in fact it's very hard to achieve and ought to be thought of as a stretch target.
The state/government over the years takes overall control of a vast panoply of important bits of society, together with an unlimited power of taxation and a huge centralised infrastructure. Its position is obviously unique.
When I go to Tesco, a tiny operation by comparison, I don't ask it to be excellent in bananas, basmati rice, stilton, dry sherry, toothbrushes and cocoa; I ask it to be very good, very competent and often excellent at everything within its domain. And it is.
So, on the same basis, I ask the state/government at all levels to be very good, very competent and often excellent at everything - that vast and widespread domain - which by law it has taken to itself and taken out of my hands. From the efficacy of our nuclear deterrent to the issuing of a driving licence.
We have come to think this is an outrageous and unreasonable expectation. It isn't.
A doctor would be more like a priest in the confessional and would be on shakey ground.
Apparently, undercutting the grid prices is not nice or something. Greens worried that he is encouraging electricity consumption.
Olivia remains the most popular baby name for girls. Mohammed (and derivations thereof) replaces Noah as the most popular baby name for boys.
Or something like that...
Clear targets
Clear plans
Clearly you have absolutely nothing constructive or relevant to say.
The majority of the electorate will welcome clarity.
The majority of the electorate will feel free to make judgement on the progress.
Those who are so blinkered as to pass judgement before Labour even took office are those who were wetting their pants on here on the 3rd July trying to convince themselves that The Tories were going to win 300 seats.
There is nothing more pointless than a blinkered mind
“In theory there is no difference between theory and practice - in practice there is”
https://optical.org/en/guidance/disclosing-confidential-information/vision-and-safe-driving-what-to-do-if-a-patient-s-vision-means-they-may-not-be-fit-to-drive/
(It will be different where Specsavers have had a referral from the DVLA for an eyesight test to evaluate a particular driver.)
Remember "Too cheap to meter", for nuclear power? Well, this one will almost certainly deliver. And you might well see contracts on the lines of "All the available power from this farm, up to capacity", for a fixed price.
At this point, the Hair Shirt Declinists will get involved. Their vision of the future doesn't include a renaissance in aluminium smelting etc. They are proud of declining electricity usage.
What is his plan to close the missile gap so we can take out Musk’s satellites?
Major NATO summit over Ukraine membership & Andriy Yermak interview |
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H26lQtKtHb0
Same as going from being all in favour of electric cars to now raising arguments about congestion and tyre particles, as it appears that affordable electric cars might actually happen.
Is Bobby Jenrick leaving?
Or might it be ... whisper it quietly ... Boris? *
* That would put the (cat / "alternative word") amongst the pigeons.
For example in health the mission appears to focus on community, tech, prevention.
The milestone is waiting lists.
I am struggling to see the direct connection.
Incidentally why is Mohammed (etc) such a common name for Muslims? Jesus doesn't seem to be for Christians?
Energy produced a zero marginal cost (which is true of solar, at a first approximation) represents a huge economic boon.
If idiots want to go round in hair shirts, let them. In return, they can stop interfering in our lives.
The $44bn he spent getting Trump elected didn't actually change the result
"The leader of the opposition thinks if you do a couple of shifts at McDonalds you can be working class, so if I keep coming back here (to Pinewood) I could be the next James Bond.
How we laughed.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-66897881#:~:text=In the mini-budget, as,did not believe the plans.
Been in Canada since 2002.Her pension has nit increased since 2002
This only applies to Canadian, Aussie, NZ, SA based ex oats.
Vine blames Starmer... FFS
He actually plays a clip if Starmer replying to a Tory MP asking about it at PMQs
Starmer replies to Tory MP to remind him Tory Govt for 14 years
Vine actually confirms he spoke to her about this 6 years ago.
Vine still blames Starmer
WTAF..
Join the fucking dots already.