Mr. Sandpit, and others, the title markets are already up for next year.
Not too interested right now. Verstappen and Russell may have advantages by being clear number one drivers. Norris at 2.75 (Ladbrokes' favourite over Verstappen at 3.75) is way too short.
On-topic: Mr. Eagles, I wonder if there's any possibility of hedging those by-election bets... not my type of market as it seems largely random.
Are court delays so bad that Punchy McPunchface can avoid a recall in the next twelve months?
Whatever the probabilities, no-to-few by-elections would have implications. Fewer banana skins for SKS, and no chance for the Conservatives to get some quality retreads back into the Commons.
I'm still struggling. Owen Jones hasn't told me what I should be feeling rn.
I last saw Owen on Twitter seeking a diagnosis for a throat infection.
I need to catch up with him so I can get his take on it before I offer a view.
I’m launching a new product -
1) we download a chunk of your existing mindstate. 2) we upload an LLM, trained on Owen Jones mindstate, into the space. 3) we connect the two, so all decisions are approved/vetoed by the OJ LLM 4) this will 100% prevent thought crime against The Revolution.
I'm still struggling. Owen Jones hasn't told me what I should be feeling rn.
I last saw Owen on Twitter seeking a diagnosis for a throat infection.
I need to catch up with him so I can get his take on it before I offer a view.
I’m launching a new product -
1) we download a chunk of your existing mindstate. 2) we upload an LLM, trained on Owen Jones mindstate, into the space. 3) we connect the two, so all decisions are approved/vetoed by the OJ LLM 4) this will 100% prevent thought crime against The Revolution.
He was having a go at "twitter leftists" the other day over Syria but insight came there none as to what I should be thinking about the whole thing. It was, however, a post without any mention of the letters I-S-R-A-E-L in that order so perhaps that throat infection has affected him more than we thought.
Got to love the BBc, the story on the Murdoch Trust case just on and the reporter, Michelle Fleurie, announces “in a statement obtained by the BBC” - seriously? Not the statement the three victorious children released across the media? A statement the BBc sneakily managed to get that no other media organisation has. Well done BBC.
Are court delays so bad that Punchy McPunchface can avoid a recall in the next twelve months?
Whatever the probabilities, no-to-few by-elections would have implications. Fewer banana skins for SKS, and no chance for the Conservatives to get some quality retreads back into the Commons.
He's not on remand, I think, so he's lower priority, unless there's a dramatic improvement in the backlog could be 2029 GE first.
Got to love the BBc, the story on the Murdoch Trust case just on and the reporter, Michelle Fleurie, announces “in a statement obtained by the BBC” - seriously? Not the statement the three victorious children released across the media? A statement the BBc sneakily managed to get that no other media organisation has. Well done BBC.
Mr. Boulay, "The BBC has learned..." is my favourite. Sounds so much better than "We read a press release."
A few specific journalistic idiocies live in my head permanently.
Richard Bilton has a few. He is or was a BBC journalist. The latter nonsense was during the migrant crisis when he was in a dinghy in the middle of the Mediterranean and observed he was surrounded by water. The other was during a forest fire in Greece. Firefighters warned him to stay back and he asked if the fire was dangerous. No, Bilton, it's one of those safe forest fires, go in for a closer look.
The kicker was when the little boy, whose name escapes me, got killed by a gunman aiming for someone else in Liverpool. In a tearful interview his mother said the family was moving home, and Bilton asked if it (her young son's murder) had affected her 'that much'. ...
A lighter nonsense from ITV was when some numb nuts observed an avalanche goes downhill, powered by gravity. Cheers, I was wondering why avalanches don't go uphill.
As it is upside down day and polls are showing Labour will lose, if we look at polls from 2019 Parliament at time it since Johnson would win a larger landslide.
So because of that I am now predicting Green landslide in 2029
Got to love the BBc, the story on the Murdoch Trust case just on and the reporter, Michelle Fleurie, announces “in a statement obtained by the BBC” - seriously? Not the statement the three victorious children released across the media? A statement the BBc sneakily managed to get that no other media organisation has. Well done BBC.
Mr. Boulay, "The BBC has learned..." is my favourite. Sounds so much better than "We read a press release."
A few specific journalistic idiocies live in my head permanently.
Richard Bilton has a few. He is or was a BBC journalist. The latter nonsense was during the migrant crisis when he was in a dinghy in the middle of the Mediterranean and observed he was surrounded by water. The other was during a forest fire in Greece. Firefighters warned him to stay back and he asked if the fire was dangerous. No, Bilton, it's one of those safe forest fires, go in for a closer look.
The kicker was when the little boy, whose name escapes me, got killed by a gunman aiming for someone else in Liverpool. In a tearful interview his mother said the family was moving home, and Bilton asked if it (her young son's murder) had affected her 'that much'. ...
A lighter nonsense from ITV was when some numb nuts observed an avalanche goes downhill, powered by gravity. Cheers, I was wondering why avalanches don't go uphill.
/endramble
As someone who is often the supplier of data to the media in response to FOI requests, I get really annoyed by media outlets claiming the credit for themselves.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
I know it's been mentioned a lot on here, but the growth of solar is going to become far prominent in political discourse:
European subsidies helped facilitate the initial growth. But I suspect the US will soon be a close second behind China now costs have fallen and you can make money installing huge solar farms.
Got to love the BBc, the story on the Murdoch Trust case just on and the reporter, Michelle Fleurie, announces “in a statement obtained by the BBC” - seriously? Not the statement the three victorious children released across the media? A statement the BBc sneakily managed to get that no other media organisation has. Well done BBC.
Mr. Boulay, "The BBC has learned..." is my favourite. Sounds so much better than "We read a press release."
A few specific journalistic idiocies live in my head permanently.
Richard Bilton has a few. He is or was a BBC journalist. The latter nonsense was during the migrant crisis when he was in a dinghy in the middle of the Mediterranean and observed he was surrounded by water. The other was during a forest fire in Greece. Firefighters warned him to stay back and he asked if the fire was dangerous. No, Bilton, it's one of those safe forest fires, go in for a closer look.
The kicker was when the little boy, whose name escapes me, got killed by a gunman aiming for someone else in Liverpool. In a tearful interview his mother said the family was moving home, and Bilton asked if it (her young son's murder) had affected her 'that much'. ...
A lighter nonsense from ITV was when some numb nuts observed an avalanche goes downhill, powered by gravity. Cheers, I was wondering why avalanches don't go uphill.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
Halve the overseas aid budget and remove any Country that's either a G20 Member or a growing economy over the past 5 years.
Take the remaining 50% and keep it as purely a "Disaster / Emergency" GENUINE NEED Fund
Got to love the BBc, the story on the Murdoch Trust case just on and the reporter, Michelle Fleurie, announces “in a statement obtained by the BBC” - seriously? Not the statement the three victorious children released across the media? A statement the BBc sneakily managed to get that no other media organisation has. Well done BBC.
Mr. Boulay, "The BBC has learned..." is my favourite. Sounds so much better than "We read a press release."
A few specific journalistic idiocies live in my head permanently.
Richard Bilton has a few. He is or was a BBC journalist. The latter nonsense was during the migrant crisis when he was in a dinghy in the middle of the Mediterranean and observed he was surrounded by water. The other was during a forest fire in Greece. Firefighters warned him to stay back and he asked if the fire was dangerous. No, Bilton, it's one of those safe forest fires, go in for a closer look.
The kicker was when the little boy, whose name escapes me, got killed by a gunman aiming for someone else in Liverpool. In a tearful interview his mother said the family was moving home, and Bilton asked if it (her young son's murder) had affected her 'that much'. ...
A lighter nonsense from ITV was when some numb nuts observed an avalanche goes downhill, powered by gravity. Cheers, I was wondering why avalanches don't go uphill.
/endramble
On a point of PBpedantry: avalanches often do go uphill on the other side of the valley in question, albeit at the end of the run and not as far as they went downhill. It's called runup and is a significant part of the problem (for instance in doing damage and blocking roads).
F1: can't tip because I took the few pound of liquidity, but with boost Piastri was 12 for the title on Ladbrokes and had a little layable at 10 on Betfair. So I am a minuscule sum green either way.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
Lebanese Media is reporting that Israeli Tanks are currently advancing North along the Border between Syria and Lebanon, with them only roughly 10 Miles now from the Outskirts of the Syrian Capital of Damascus. https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1866311431794377018
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
Halve the overseas aid budget and remove any Country that's either a G20 Member or a growing economy over the past 5 years.
Take the remaining 50% and keep it as purely a "Disaster / Emergency" GENUINE NEED Fund
That's ball park £13bn quid...
Get highly irritated by the ever increasing numbers of refugees and the cost of processing them from failed or failing countries.
Wonder if there is any connection between the 2 policies.
Got to love the BBc, the story on the Murdoch Trust case just on and the reporter, Michelle Fleurie, announces “in a statement obtained by the BBC” - seriously? Not the statement the three victorious children released across the media? A statement the BBc sneakily managed to get that no other media organisation has. Well done BBC.
You mean it wasn't via a dead drop in a hollow tree stump in Regents Park?
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
Doesn't bode well, they'll just be looking for outsourcing opportunities, which is likely to result in increased costs/worst performance.
Possibly - and such an exercise does of course depend on the competence of those conducting it.
But a process that actually did a decent analysis of resource inputs versus outputs/outcomes could identify opportunities for savings without assuming any role for outsourcing.
If we do have some by elections this parliament it is certainly possible Reform could win some of them as UKIP won a few by elections from 2010-15
They won two, both with traitorous pig-dog defectors defector-incumbents.
Which was actually more than the usual by election winners the LDs won. The LDs only won one by election in the 2010 to 2015 parliament.
It is now Reform surging in the polls, whereas the LDs are unchanged in polling from July and less well placed to capitalise on the Labour government's unpopularity than Farage's party is
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
Halve the overseas aid budget and remove any Country that's either a G20 Member or a growing economy over the past 5 years.
Take the remaining 50% and keep it as purely a "Disaster / Emergency" GENUINE NEED Fund
That's ball park £13bn quid...
But the overseas aid budget it also there to go towards our share of the Climate Reparations ($350 Billion annually) as agreed at the recent COP.
Also any cutting of the Overseas budget will see a huge amount of pushback from Charities and NGO's who are the beneficiaries of it when given money from it to manage issues and the like to take their cut.
Also there is the money to be found for the WASPI women, we had leaders of 8 parties demanding these people get their compensation. That will be more than £10 Billion.
Got to love the BBc, the story on the Murdoch Trust case just on and the reporter, Michelle Fleurie, announces “in a statement obtained by the BBC” - seriously? Not the statement the three victorious children released across the media? A statement the BBc sneakily managed to get that no other media organisation has. Well done BBC.
Mr. Boulay, "The BBC has learned..." is my favourite. Sounds so much better than "We read a press release."
A few specific journalistic idiocies live in my head permanently.
Richard Bilton has a few. He is or was a BBC journalist. The latter nonsense was during the migrant crisis when he was in a dinghy in the middle of the Mediterranean and observed he was surrounded by water. The other was during a forest fire in Greece. Firefighters warned him to stay back and he asked if the fire was dangerous. No, Bilton, it's one of those safe forest fires, go in for a closer look.
The kicker was when the little boy, whose name escapes me, got killed by a gunman aiming for someone else in Liverpool. In a tearful interview his mother said the family was moving home, and Bilton asked if it (her young son's murder) had affected her 'that much'. ...
A lighter nonsense from ITV was when some numb nuts observed an avalanche goes downhill, powered by gravity. Cheers, I was wondering why avalanches don't go uphill.
/endramble
"It has emerged..."
We should start the Pesto award. For the journalist who does the most outstanding example of the above.
Lebanese Media is reporting that Israeli Tanks are currently advancing North along the Border between Syria and Lebanon, with them only roughly 10 Miles now from the Outskirts of the Syrian Capital of Damascus. https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1866311431794377018
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
Halve the overseas aid budget and remove any Country that's either a G20 Member or a growing economy over the past 5 years.
Take the remaining 50% and keep it as purely a "Disaster / Emergency" GENUINE NEED Fund
That's ball park £13bn quid...
But the overseas aid budget it also there to go towards our share of the Climate Reparations ($350 Billion annually) as agreed at the recent COP.
Also any cutting of the Overseas budget will see a huge amount of pushback from Charities and NGO's who are the beneficiaries of it when given money from it to manage issues and the like to take their cut.
Also there is the money to be found for the WASPI women, we had leaders of 8 parties demanding these people get their compensation. That will be more than £10 Billion.
Put Trident on the Overseas Aid Budget.
“Offering instant urban redevelopment opportunities, world wide.”
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
A somewhat fiscally conservative move by Reeves, at the risk of seeing further Labour leakage in the polls but this time to the Greens. She would hope to win over a few Tories in compensation
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
That Reeves Plan.
aka A-U-S-T-E-R-I-T-Y
From my memories of working in the public sector in a couple of temp roles many moons ago the work seemed to consist of many meetings. Lots of meetings. The more important the person the more meetings had to be made. & budgets. Fiercely guarded budgets. The other thing I came across anecdotally whilst on an accounting course was one participant who assured his boss that their budget definitely would be spent by year end by hook or by crook ! (Underspends often being punished I think by a reduced budget next year iirc)
Got to love the BBc, the story on the Murdoch Trust case just on and the reporter, Michelle Fleurie, announces “in a statement obtained by the BBC” - seriously? Not the statement the three victorious children released across the media? A statement the BBc sneakily managed to get that no other media organisation has. Well done BBC.
Mr. Boulay, "The BBC has learned..." is my favourite. Sounds so much better than "We read a press release."
A few specific journalistic idiocies live in my head permanently.
Richard Bilton has a few. He is or was a BBC journalist. The latter nonsense was during the migrant crisis when he was in a dinghy in the middle of the Mediterranean and observed he was surrounded by water. The other was during a forest fire in Greece. Firefighters warned him to stay back and he asked if the fire was dangerous. No, Bilton, it's one of those safe forest fires, go in for a closer look.
The kicker was when the little boy, whose name escapes me, got killed by a gunman aiming for someone else in Liverpool. In a tearful interview his mother said the family was moving home, and Bilton asked if it (her young son's murder) had affected her 'that much'. ...
A lighter nonsense from ITV was when some numb nuts observed an avalanche goes downhill, powered by gravity. Cheers, I was wondering why avalanches don't go uphill.
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
If we do have some by elections this parliament it is certainly possible Reform could win some of them as UKIP won a few by elections from 2010-15
They won two, both with traitorous pig-dog defectors defector-incumbents.
Which was actually more than the usual by election winners the LDs won. The LDs only won one by election in the 2010 to 2015 parliament.
It is now Reform surging in the polls, whereas the LDs are unchanged in polling from July and less well placed to capitalise on the Labour government's unpopularity than Farage's party is
Whereas I am not disagreeing with you and I think you are right and if the by elections are in the right areas (and there are plenty of them) I think Reform will win by elections, primarily from Labour and possibly from the Conservatives.
However Reform does not have the LD by-election machine. They are trying to do so and they are getting the money and the members in numbers, but that is not what makes the LD by election machine. They succeed because of the targeting organisation which lends itself superbly to a by election and the type of members who are willing to travel and work relentlessly.
There are plenty of areas where the LDs would be the main challengers and will win by elections still if given the opportunity in this parliament.
But I think you are right and Reform could pick up some spectacular by election wins without that by election machine.
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
I presume a white tailed eagle is not similar to the white eared Elephant ?
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
Sounds great, even though I hadn't a clue who Rose Tremain was. Context for all this stuff?
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
In a few lines, you both name-drop and tell a better tale than out resident 'travel writer'.
asks people who they prefer out of Scholz and Merz to be next chancellor Scholz 43% Merz 45%
That Merz is only 2% ahead of the widely despised Scholz, who is leading a historically unpopular government, and whose party (on 15% in this poll) is almost 20% behind CDU/CSU in the polls, shows how unconvinced people are by Merz.
Does this point to the possibility of a serious polling miss when the time comes?
Probably not - German opinion polling (at least at the national level) is rarely far off. I also don't really see the polls changing massively before the election itself. Though last time the SPD did move from 3rd place 2 months before the election to 1st place in the election, so who knows? Unlikely to happen this time around, though I wouldn't be surprised if the SPD knock the AfD from 2nd place to 3rd place. But it will still very likely end up with the only options being a Union-led coalition with the SPD or a Union-led coalition with the Greens.
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
I presume a white tailed eagle is not similar to the white eared Elephant ?
AKA Sea Eagle. For a bird, pretty massive. Like a flying barndoor. Last time I saw one it was circling overhead when we were exploring the north shore of Eigg - isolated place under high cliffs with superb views of the Skye and Rum Cuillin.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
asks people who they prefer out of Scholz and Merz to be next chancellor Scholz 43% Merz 45%
That Merz is only 2% ahead of the widely despised Scholz, who is leading a historically unpopular government, and whose party (on 15% in this poll) is almost 20% behind CDU/CSU in the polls, shows how unconvinced people are by Merz.
Does this point to the possibility of a serious polling miss when the time comes?
Probably not - German opinion polling (at least at the national level) is rarely far off. I also don't really see the polls changing massively before the election itself. Though last time the SPD did move from 3rd place 2 months before the election to 1st place in the election, so who knows? Unlikely to happen this time around, though I wouldn't be surprised if the SPD knock the AfD from 2nd place to 3rd place. But it will still very likely end up with the only options being a Union-led coalition with the SPD or a Union-led coalition with the Greens.
Merz if he wins would be the most rightwing German chancellor since WW2, no Merkel centrist is he.
Yet the deep unpopularity of the SPD led government as with so many incumbent governments at present gives him a real prospect of power at the next German election.
The CSU have now ruled out a coalition with the Greens so most likely it will be another CDU/CSU-SPD grand coalition
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
Ooh, are the eagles now common enough in Devon for that? I saw the first reintroduction when the eagles brought over from Norway etc were being kept in individual cages on Rum for an acclimatisation period before being let out. So it's quite something to see the success.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
TV tax frozen in 2010. What had to go? Live EFL football.
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
Sounds great, even though I hadn't a clue who Rose Tremain was. Context for all this stuff?
How are you going to get a white tailed eagle and Dame Judi Dench in the same place at the same time? I imagine DJD's calendar is pretty full and WTEs tend to be unreliable about keeping appointments. Are there any in Devon?
If we do have some by elections this parliament it is certainly possible Reform could win some of them as UKIP won a few by elections from 2010-15
They won two, both with traitorous pig-dog defectors defector-incumbents.
Which was actually more than the usual by election winners the LDs won. The LDs only won one by election in the 2010 to 2015 parliament.
It is now Reform surging in the polls, whereas the LDs are unchanged in polling from July and less well placed to capitalise on the Labour government's unpopularity than Farage's party is
Whereas I am not disagreeing with you and I think you are right and if the by elections are in the right areas (and there are plenty of them) I think Reform will win by elections, primarily from Labour and possibly from the Conservatives.
However Reform does not have the LD by-election machine. They are trying to do so and they are getting the money and the members in numbers, but that is not what makes the LD by election machine. They succeed because of the targeting organisation which lends itself superbly to a by election and the type of members who are willing to travel and work relentlessly.
There are plenty of areas where the LDs would be the main challengers and will win by elections still if given the opportunity in this parliament.
But I think you are right and Reform could pick up some spectacular by election wins without that by election machine.
Reform don't have the LDs by election machine no but given they are now polling over 20% in most polls with Labour down 5-10% on July and the Tories and LDs little changed Reform could win by elections even if they don't put out a single leaflet or canvass a single house
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
I’m trying to remember - it was under a Conservative government - when that literally happened.
An NHS admin got a request to cut the budget. So she gave all the nurses working in oncology at Great Ormond Street notice that their jobs were at risk. And sent a boasting email to her colleagues that their allowances for entertainment etc would be saved by the political backlash she was going to create…
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
Sounds great, even though I hadn't a clue who Rose Tremain was. Context for all this stuff?
How are you going to get a white tailed eagle and Dame Judi Dench in the same place at the same time? I imagine DJD's calendar is pretty full and WTEs tend to be unreliable about keeping appointments. Are there any in Devon?
The Hawk Conservancy near Andover would be my best bet.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
Getting budgets reduced sensibly is clearly a problem. However the idea it can be done by cutting staff events is absurd. Staff xmas parties in the public sector, outside of Boris' No 10 gang, havent been a thing for at least a decade.
From the outside the easiest cut is to use permanent staff instead of far more highly paid contractors.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
Halve the overseas aid budget and remove any Country that's either a G20 Member or a growing economy over the past 5 years.
Take the remaining 50% and keep it as purely a "Disaster / Emergency" GENUINE NEED Fund
That's ball park £13bn quid...
But the overseas aid budget it also there to go towards our share of the Climate Reparations ($350 Billion annually) as agreed at the recent COP.
Also any cutting of the Overseas budget will see a huge amount of pushback from Charities and NGO's who are the beneficiaries of it when given money from it to manage issues and the like to take their cut.
Also there is the money to be found for the WASPI women, we had leaders of 8 parties demanding these people get their compensation. That will be more than £10 Billion.
We'll then, I might give Rachel a call.
Halve the Overseas Aid Budget for the next 4 years.
Saving ball park 24 billion
Fund £5bn in 2025 to 50% fund ALL Waspi claimants.
Set aside 1.5bn next 3 years to complete that... Waspis paid by 2029
Still got 14bn in surplus...
Impact on WASPI
5bn boost to spending power of millions of pensioners
Morally and ethically hammers the Tories over past decade of denial
Significantly mitigates a lot if the WFA noise
A significant Poll boost amongst most anti Labour sector.
Spikes Reform little englanders sails too
She should go further too with her anti corruption investigation in to Tory contracts for the boys
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
Getting budgets reduced sensibly is clearly a problem. However the idea it can be done by cutting staff events is absurd. Staff xmas parties in the public sector, outside of Boris' No 10 gang, havent been a thing for at least a decade.
From the outside the easiest cut is to use permanent staff instead of far more highly paid contractors.
I am (sort of) in the public sector. We had a very nice Xmas lunch yesterday. No public money was spent on it.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
TV tax frozen in 2010. What had to go? Live EFL football.
Seems an unusual example of a good budget cutting decision AFAICS. The cost of broadcasting football is astronomical.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
"Efficiency savings" is a meaningless term. The correct description is spending cuts. I'd point this out if it were the Cons doing it and tbf it's no different because it's Labour.
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
Sounds great, even though I hadn't a clue who Rose Tremain was. Context for all this stuff?
How are you going to get a white tailed eagle and Dame Judi Dench in the same place at the same time? I imagine DJD's calendar is pretty full and WTEs tend to be unreliable about keeping appointments. Are there any in Devon?
I don't care as it was a great story. @MarqueeMark was probably happy to promise DJD anything. Working out how to keep the promise comes later.
I would struggle to come up with that level of name dropping. Best I can do at the moment is we regularly borrow Richard Curtis and Emma Freud's beach hut.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
That Reeves Plan.
aka A-U-S-T-E-R-I-T-Y
From my memories of working in the public sector in a couple of temp roles many moons ago the work seemed to consist of many meetings. Lots of meetings. The more important the person the more meetings had to be made. & budgets. Fiercely guarded budgets. The other thing I came across anecdotally whilst on an accounting course was one participant who assured his boss that their budget definitely would be spent by year end by hook or by crook ! (Underspends often being punished I think by a reduced budget next year iirc)
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
The awesome reality, which 2025 will explore further, is that to fund stuff the state has taken to itself to fund reasonably and in a fairly relaxed way, with a bit of slack so that the entire NHS/teaching staff/social services department/court system doesn't go off sick with burnout, is going to need approximately an additional £100 billion more, not £40 billion less.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
That Reeves Plan.
aka A-U-S-T-E-R-I-T-Y
From my memories of working in the public sector in a couple of temp roles many moons ago the work seemed to consist of many meetings. Lots of meetings. The more important the person the more meetings had to be made. & budgets. Fiercely guarded budgets. The other thing I came across anecdotally whilst on an accounting course was one participant who assured his boss that their budget definitely would be spent by year end by hook or by crook ! (Underspends often being punished I think by a reduced budget next year iirc)
Same in the private sector.
Same in any organisation of size. The KGB was run by that method…
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
I’m trying to remember - it was under a Conservative government - when that literally happened.
An NHS admin got a request to cut the budget. So she gave all the nurses working in oncology at Great Ormond Street notice that their jobs were at risk. And sent a boasting email to her colleagues that their allowances for entertainment etc would be saved by the political backlash she was going to create…
That sounds like another Malmesbury tall tale to me.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
Halve the overseas aid budget and remove any Country that's either a G20 Member or a growing economy over the past 5 years.
Take the remaining 50% and keep it as purely a "Disaster / Emergency" GENUINE NEED Fund
That's ball park £13bn quid...
But the overseas aid budget it also there to go towards our share of the Climate Reparations ($350 Billion annually) as agreed at the recent COP.
Also any cutting of the Overseas budget will see a huge amount of pushback from Charities and NGO's who are the beneficiaries of it when given money from it to manage issues and the like to take their cut.
Also there is the money to be found for the WASPI women, we had leaders of 8 parties demanding these people get their compensation. That will be more than £10 Billion.
We'll then, I might give Rachel a call.
Halve the Overseas Aid Budget for the next 4 years.
Saving ball park 24 billion
Fund £5bn in 2025 to 50% fund ALL Waspi claimants.
Set aside 1.5bn next 3 years to complete that... Waspis paid by 2029
Still got 14bn in surplus...
Impact on WASPI
5bn boost to spending power of millions of pensioners
Morally and ethically hammers the Tories over past decade of denial
Significantly mitigates a lot if the WFA noise
A significant Poll boost amongst most anti Labour sector.
Spikes Reform little englanders sails too
She should go further too with her anti corruption investigation in to Tory contracts for the boys
Can save £5bn don’t give the WASPI claimants anything
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
Getting budgets reduced sensibly is clearly a problem. However the idea it can be done by cutting staff events is absurd. Staff xmas parties in the public sector, outside of Boris' No 10 gang, havent been a thing for at least a decade.
From the outside the easiest cut is to use permanent staff instead of far more highly paid contractors.
I am (sort of) in the public sector. We had a very nice Xmas lunch yesterday. No public money was spent on it.
Yes, should have made clear I was talking about tax payer funded xmas parties and social events.
If we do have some by elections this parliament it is certainly possible Reform could win some of them as UKIP won a few by elections from 2010-15
They won two, both with traitorous pig-dog defectors defector-incumbents.
Which was actually more than the usual by election winners the LDs won. The LDs only won one by election in the 2010 to 2015 parliament.
It is now Reform surging in the polls, whereas the LDs are unchanged in polling from July and less well placed to capitalise on the Labour government's unpopularity than Farage's party is
Whereas I am not disagreeing with you and I think you are right and if the by elections are in the right areas (and there are plenty of them) I think Reform will win by elections, primarily from Labour and possibly from the Conservatives.
However Reform does not have the LD by-election machine. They are trying to do so and they are getting the money and the members in numbers, but that is not what makes the LD by election machine. They succeed because of the targeting organisation which lends itself superbly to a by election and the type of members who are willing to travel and work relentlessly.
There are plenty of areas where the LDs would be the main challengers and will win by elections still if given the opportunity in this parliament.
But I think you are right and Reform could pick up some spectacular by election wins without that by election machine.
Reform don't have the LDs by election machine no but given they are now polling over 20% in most polls with Labour down 5-10% on July and the Tories and LDs little changed Reform could win by elections even if they don't put out a single leaflet or canvass a single house
Yes I agree and if it is in the right area (and as I said there are plenty of them). Although I think they would still have to campaign, but I suspect they could put up a decent showing anyway. Their leaflets (from what I saw at the GE) were very good. I suspect they could do a decent canvas and poster campaign. I suspect their GOTV would not match any of the other parties, but I think the margin would be enough that it doesn't matter.
Key also is there would be very little overlap between Reform and the LDs so there would be few if any areas where they would compete. A by election would either be a Reform target or a LD target, not both. I haven't looked it up but I suspect there are more opportunities for Reform.
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
Sounds great, even though I hadn't a clue who Rose Tremain was. Context for all this stuff?
How are you going to get a white tailed eagle and Dame Judi Dench in the same place at the same time? I imagine DJD's calendar is pretty full and WTEs tend to be unreliable about keeping appointments. Are there any in Devon?
I don't care as it was a great story. @MarqueeMark was probably happy to promise DJD anything. Working out how to keep the promise comes later.
I would struggle to come up with that level of name dropping. Best I can do at the moment is we regularly borrow Richard Curtis and Emma Freud's beach hut.
I once met Bernie Ecclestone. I didn't realise who he was at first, and we discussed concrete for a few minutes. As we talked, I got a slow, dawning realisation that I knew this bloke. Only when the receptionist said his first name did it fully click. Somewhat surprisingly, he was very friendly, interested, and knowledgeable.
And no, I didn't ask him to bung me a Bernie...
I also met a fair few (over half, I think) of the F1 drivers from about 1994/5. Not Schumacher, sadly.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
TV tax frozen in 2010. What had to go? Live EFL football.
Seems an unusual example of a good budget cutting decision AFAICS. The cost of broadcasting football is astronomical.
For Sky, it is. BBC, I think, were subletting (I think that's right) some games. I think the deal was 10 Championship games, an EFL Cup semi final (one leg of each?) and the EFL Cup final. Pulling the plug on that deal saved very little money. But it sent a message to the Tories: Cut our budget, and we'll ditch the popular stuff.
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
Ooh, are the eagles now common enough in Devon for that? I saw the first reintroduction when the eagles brought over from Norway etc were being kept in individual cages on Rum for an acclimatisation period before being let out. So it's quite something to see the success.
Best place that is guaranteed is the Isle of Mull. Which she is definetely up for. However, the nearest to her that are regular are probably the reintroduced birds on the Isle of Wight.
It came about because I said I loved watching her rection to seeing a Golden Eagle with Hamza Yassin:
If we do have some by elections this parliament it is certainly possible Reform could win some of them as UKIP won a few by elections from 2010-15
They won two, both with traitorous pig-dog defectors defector-incumbents.
Which was actually more than the usual by election winners the LDs won. The LDs only won one by election in the 2010 to 2015 parliament.
It is now Reform surging in the polls, whereas the LDs are unchanged in polling from July and less well placed to capitalise on the Labour government's unpopularity than Farage's party is
Whereas I am not disagreeing with you and I think you are right and if the by elections are in the right areas (and there are plenty of them) I think Reform will win by elections, primarily from Labour and possibly from the Conservatives.
However Reform does not have the LD by-election machine. They are trying to do so and they are getting the money and the members in numbers, but that is not what makes the LD by election machine. They succeed because of the targeting organisation which lends itself superbly to a by election and the type of members who are willing to travel and work relentlessly.
There are plenty of areas where the LDs would be the main challengers and will win by elections still if given the opportunity in this parliament.
But I think you are right and Reform could pick up some spectacular by election wins without that by election machine.
Reform don't have the LDs by election machine no but given they are now polling over 20% in most polls with Labour down 5-10% on July and the Tories and LDs little changed Reform could win by elections even if they don't put out a single leaflet or canvass a single house
A by-election in almost any GB seat would command massive attention, even more than usual. The Lab/Con collapse, the LD challenge, the possible Reform vote in a large number of seats, SNP's rise in response to Lab's fall, etc means even Bootle or South Holland would be exciting.
Got to love the BBc, the story on the Murdoch Trust case just on and the reporter, Michelle Fleurie, announces “in a statement obtained by the BBC” - seriously? Not the statement the three victorious children released across the media? A statement the BBc sneakily managed to get that no other media organisation has. Well done BBC.
Mr. Boulay, "The BBC has learned..." is my favourite. Sounds so much better than "We read a press release."
A few specific journalistic idiocies live in my head permanently.
Richard Bilton has a few. He is or was a BBC journalist. The latter nonsense was during the migrant crisis when he was in a dinghy in the middle of the Mediterranean and observed he was surrounded by water. The other was during a forest fire in Greece. Firefighters warned him to stay back and he asked if the fire was dangerous. No, Bilton, it's one of those safe forest fires, go in for a closer look.
The kicker was when the little boy, whose name escapes me, got killed by a gunman aiming for someone else in Liverpool. In a tearful interview his mother said the family was moving home, and Bilton asked if it (her young son's murder) had affected her 'that much'. ...
A lighter nonsense from ITV was when some numb nuts observed an avalanche goes downhill, powered by gravity. Cheers, I was wondering why avalanches don't go uphill.
/endramble
"It has emerged..."
Never mind that. Morris used the quote button.
And the Earth moved, just a little, off its axis...
Back in grey, grey, grey Devon after a trip up to London, where I drove Rose Tremain around to show her the Christmas lights, had THE most fabulously light sticky-toffee pudding cooked by a Labour MP and then during a lovely chat, agreed to show Dame Judie Dench a White-tailed Eagle before she finally loses her sight.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
Ooh, are the eagles now common enough in Devon for that? I saw the first reintroduction when the eagles brought over from Norway etc were being kept in individual cages on Rum for an acclimatisation period before being let out. So it's quite something to see the success.
Best place that is guaranteed is the Isle of Mull. Which she is definetely up for. However, the nearest to her that are regular are probably the reintroduced birds on the Isle of Wight.
It came about because I said I loved watching her rection to seeing a Golden Eagle with Hamza Yassin:
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
I’m trying to remember - it was under a Conservative government - when that literally happened.
An NHS admin got a request to cut the budget. So she gave all the nurses working in oncology at Great Ormond Street notice that their jobs were at risk. And sent a boasting email to her colleagues that their allowances for entertainment etc would be saved by the political backlash she was going to create…
That sounds like another Malmesbury tall tale to me.
He argues that Badenoch keeps tripping herself up through an inability to ignore provocations, and thus lands herself with poor messaging.
She's never grown up from being the agitated 13 year old novice debator at school who is hammered and ridiculed and who then seeks provocation and a verbal fight with everyone.
The awful droning voice reminiscent of a woman in transition to a mail on medication to reduce the tonal range does her no favours either.
Pritti is extreme but coherent, Braverman is just evil, Atkins, Whately, Trott and Coutinho are just intellectually challenged novices..
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
TV tax frozen in 2010. What had to go? Live EFL football.
Seems an unusual example of a good budget cutting decision AFAICS. The cost of broadcasting football is astronomical.
For Sky, it is. BBC, I think, were subletting (I think that's right) some games. I think the deal was 10 Championship games, an EFL Cup semi final (one leg of each?) and the EFL Cup final. Pulling the plug on that deal saved very little money. But it sent a message to the Tories: Cut our budget, and we'll ditch the popular stuff.
Same reason the RAF always open the spending review with scrapping the Red Arrows. It’s the only thing the vast majority of the public ever see of the RAF. Ignore that the Reds are famous worldwide and are a great recruiting tool for the service.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
Getting budgets reduced sensibly is clearly a problem. However the idea it can be done by cutting staff events is absurd. Staff xmas parties in the public sector, outside of Boris' No 10 gang, havent been a thing for at least a decade.
From the outside the easiest cut is to use permanent staff instead of far more highly paid contractors.
I am (sort of) in the public sector. We had a very nice Xmas lunch yesterday. No public money was spent on it.
Yes, should have made clear I was talking about tax payer funded xmas parties and social events.
I once had a rich tea and a cup of instant coffee at the state's expense. A few cuts in those should reach 5% of departmental spending quite quickly.
The absolute inherent sexism in the WASPI claims is quite staggering.
When a generation of women worked towards a pension at 60 their anger is fully justified.
Equality of pensionable age at 65 or 66 is not the issue and I'd agree as being fair.
The issue with Waspis though is those in their late 40s and especially early 50s thrown off a cliff by the Cameron Govt.
A more gentle transition was needed.
Can you imagine if on the day they announced the Waspi decision that had told every male his new retirement age is 70 or 71.
The change was signalled well enough. And the women who did pay attention, and saved into their pensions accordingly, will also get the pay-out. Kerching!
I'm glad you acknowledge the inherent sexism than had men working for years longer than women, often in much more physical jobs. Where's your anger about that?
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
Getting budgets reduced sensibly is clearly a problem. However the idea it can be done by cutting staff events is absurd. Staff xmas parties in the public sector, outside of Boris' No 10 gang, havent been a thing for at least a decade.
From the outside the easiest cut is to use permanent staff instead of far more highly paid contractors.
I am (sort of) in the public sector. We had a very nice Xmas lunch yesterday. No public money was spent on it.
Yes, should have made clear I was talking about tax payer funded xmas parties and social events.
I once had a rich tea and a cup of instant coffee at the state's expense. A few cuts in those should reach 5% of departmental spending quite quickly.
Why are they giving out rich tea anyway? Why not median pay tea or even paupers tea if we taxpayers are funding it.
The Guardian (BBC is similar) describes Reeves's latest plan thus:
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
I seem to recall Reform were roundly mocked before the election for a proposal in their manifesto very much like this.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
TV tax frozen in 2010. What had to go? Live EFL football.
Seems an unusual example of a good budget cutting decision AFAICS. The cost of broadcasting football is astronomical.
For Sky, it is. BBC, I think, were subletting (I think that's right) some games. I think the deal was 10 Championship games, an EFL Cup semi final (one leg of each?) and the EFL Cup final. Pulling the plug on that deal saved very little money. But it sent a message to the Tories: Cut our budget, and we'll ditch the popular stuff.
Same reason the RAF always open the spending review with scrapping the Red Arrows. It’s the only thing the vast majority of the public ever see of the RAF. Ignore that the Reds are famous worldwide and are a great recruiting tool for the service.
Standard operating procedure in many, many organisations
1) told to cut 2) come up with a cut that is absolutely unacceptable. 3) get the cuts withdrawn
Comments
I need to catch up with him so I can get his take on it before I offer a view.
Not too interested right now. Verstappen and Russell may have advantages by being clear number one drivers. Norris at 2.75 (Ladbrokes' favourite over Verstappen at 3.75) is way too short.
On-topic: Mr. Eagles, I wonder if there's any possibility of hedging those by-election bets... not my type of market as it seems largely random.
Whatever the probabilities, no-to-few by-elections would have implications. Fewer banana skins for SKS, and no chance for the Conservatives to get some quality retreads back into the Commons.
1) we download a chunk of your existing mindstate.
2) we upload an LLM, trained on Owen Jones mindstate, into the space.
3) we connect the two, so all decisions are approved/vetoed by the OJ LLM
4) this will 100% prevent thought crime against The Revolution.
https://www.latimes.com/environment/newsletter/2024-12-05/column-l-a-s-massive-new-solar-farm-is-cheap-and-impressive-more-please-boiling-point
Note who is supplying the batteries.
But I guess this is a lure for over excited petition-signing reform supporters who think the coming of their Great Man is only months away now surely?
A few specific journalistic idiocies live in my head permanently.
Richard Bilton has a few. He is or was a BBC journalist. The latter nonsense was during the migrant crisis when he was in a dinghy in the middle of the Mediterranean and observed he was surrounded by water. The other was during a forest fire in Greece. Firefighters warned him to stay back and he asked if the fire was dangerous. No, Bilton, it's one of those safe forest fires, go in for a closer look.
The kicker was when the little boy, whose name escapes me, got killed by a gunman aiming for someone else in Liverpool. In a tearful interview his mother said the family was moving home, and Bilton asked if it (her young son's murder) had affected her 'that much'. ...
A lighter nonsense from ITV was when some numb nuts observed an avalanche goes downhill, powered by gravity. Cheers, I was wondering why avalanches don't go uphill.
/endramble
So because of that I am now predicting Green landslide in 2029
As part of the review, Reeves will insist that every government department find efficiency savings of 5% of their budget for the coming year over the following three years
Now, while it is impossible to know what that means, 5% of total government/state managed spending is heading for £40-£50 billion. An example the BBC gives is a programme costing about £5 million per year. 10,000 such cuts, for ever, would total £50 billion.
At the same time there is no sector - not a single one - where someone is not agitating for substantially increased expenditure.
This is one to watch.
European subsidies helped facilitate the initial growth. But I suspect the US will soon be a close second behind China now costs have fallen and you can make money installing huge solar farms.
Do have a read. Some of it is quite funny
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/it-s-not-just-nigel-farage-al-murray-the-pub-landlord-loses-south-thanet-bid-despite-patriotic-pledges-10235430.html
Take the remaining 50% and keep it as purely a "Disaster / Emergency" GENUINE NEED Fund
That's ball park £13bn quid...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election#/media/File:Opinion_polling_graph_for_the_next_United_Kingdom_general_election_(post-2024).svg
Good morning PB. Two weeks until Christmas Eve!
Never trust a bookie who offers only one side of a bet!
https://news.sky.com/story/bankers-to-scrutinise-public-sector-spending-to-bring-private-sector-into-the-heart-of-government-13270580
https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1866311431794377018
traitorous pig-dog defectorsdefector-incumbents.Wonder if there is any connection between the 2 policies.
Disappointing.
But a process that actually did a decent analysis of resource inputs versus outputs/outcomes could identify opportunities for savings without assuming any role for outsourcing.
It is now Reform surging in the polls, whereas the LDs are unchanged in polling from July and less well placed to capitalise on the Labour government's unpopularity than Farage's party is
Also any cutting of the Overseas budget will see a huge amount of pushback from Charities and NGO's who are the beneficiaries of it when given money from it to manage issues and the like to take their cut.
Also there is the money to be found for the WASPI women, we had leaders of 8 parties demanding these people get their compensation. That will be more than £10 Billion.
Back every one sided special offered by a high street bookie you would likely lose at 50%+ margin, which is pretty staggering.
Back them extremely selectively and you can win at a 50% margin, which is not close to sustainable on any other market.
aka A-U-S-T-E-R-I-T-Y
George Osborne to the Blue courtesy phone…
“Offering instant urban redevelopment opportunities, world wide.”
(Underspends often being punished I think by a reduced budget next year iirc)
.....and all that before the country took a closer look at the farmers on show in last nights PPB from the Tories.
I thought it was a spoof until I realised it wasn't. But as funny as any I've seen. I was jealous.
Oh, and got an invite for lunch at Sir Tim Rice's place.
Which was nice.
However Reform does not have the LD by-election machine. They are trying to do so and they are getting the money and the members in numbers, but that is not what makes the LD by election machine. They succeed because of the targeting organisation which lends itself superbly to a by election and the type of members who are willing to travel and work relentlessly.
There are plenty of areas where the LDs would be the main challengers and will win by elections still if given the opportunity in this parliament.
But I think you are right and Reform could pick up some spectacular by election wins without that by election machine.
I suspect that the this will hit the usual problem with trying to find savings in bureaucratic organisations - I.E. it won't be the budget for the "staff team building and social event co-ordinators" that gets cut, but instead the only way to make the numbers add up will be closing children's cancer ward... Repeat x10,000 until the cuts are too politically toxic to happen.
Yet the deep unpopularity of the SPD led government as with so many incumbent governments at present gives him a real prospect of power at the next German election.
The CSU have now ruled out a coalition with the Greens so most likely it will be another CDU/CSU-SPD grand coalition
An NHS admin got a request to cut the budget. So she gave all the nurses working in oncology at Great Ormond Street notice that their jobs were at risk. And sent a boasting email to her colleagues that their allowances for entertainment etc would be saved by the political backlash she was going to create…
From the outside the easiest cut is to use permanent staff instead of far more highly paid contractors.
He argues that Badenoch keeps tripping herself up through an inability to ignore provocations, and thus lands herself with poor messaging.
Halve the Overseas Aid Budget for the next 4 years.
Saving ball park 24 billion
Fund £5bn in 2025 to 50% fund ALL Waspi claimants.
Set aside 1.5bn next 3 years to complete that... Waspis paid by 2029
Still got 14bn in surplus...
Impact on WASPI
5bn boost to spending power of millions of pensioners
Morally and ethically hammers the Tories over past decade of denial
Significantly mitigates a lot if the WFA noise
A significant Poll boost amongst most anti Labour sector.
Spikes Reform little englanders sails too
She should go further too with her anti corruption investigation in to Tory contracts for the boys
I would struggle to come up with that level of name dropping. Best I can do at the moment is we regularly borrow Richard Curtis and Emma Freud's beach hut.
Equality of pensionable age at 65 or 66 is not the issue and I'd agree as being fair.
The issue with Waspis though is those in their late 40s and especially early 50s thrown off a cliff by the Cameron Govt.
A more gentle transition was needed.
Can you imagine if on the day they announced the Waspi decision that had told every male his new retirement age is 70 or 71.
I thought that all the super wealthy had left the country.
Key also is there would be very little overlap between Reform and the LDs so there would be few if any areas where they would compete. A by election would either be a Reform target or a LD target, not both. I haven't looked it up but I suspect there are more opportunities for Reform.
And no, I didn't ask him to bung me a Bernie...
I also met a fair few (over half, I think) of the F1 drivers from about 1994/5. Not Schumacher, sadly.
It came about because I said I loved watching her rection to seeing a Golden Eagle with Hamza Yassin:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7Bxd_Ab7I0
Then I told her how massive the White-tailed Eagle is. And she got very excited and said could she see one? Damn right you can...leave it to me.
The boasting email leaked, of course.
The awful droning voice reminiscent of a woman in transition to a mail on medication to reduce the tonal range does her no favours either.
Pritti is extreme but coherent, Braverman is just evil, Atkins, Whately, Trott and Coutinho are just intellectually challenged novices..
Jesus how the Tories need Penny Mordaunt
I'm glad you acknowledge the inherent sexism than had men working for years longer than women, often in much more physical jobs. Where's your anger about that?
1) told to cut
2) come up with a cut that is absolutely unacceptable.
3) get the cuts withdrawn
The test of good management is to call out on 2)