Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Some 2025 specials – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 12,212
edited December 17 in General
imageSome 2025 specials – politicalbetting.com

Ladbrokes have a 2025 specials market up and to be honest this appears a good way to contribute to the Ladbrokes bonus fund.

Read the full story here

«134

Comments

  • TazTaz Posts: 14,956
    1st like HTS
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,166
    Taz said:

    1st like HTS

    Is your future equally uncertain ... and should we even trust you ?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,040
    Taz said:

    1st like HTS

    I'm still struggling. Owen Jones hasn't told me what I should be feeling rn.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,166
    Betting rule of thumb is to ignore bookies' specials.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,956
    edited December 10
    TOPPING said:

    Taz said:

    1st like HTS

    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.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,140
    Nigelb said:

    Betting rule of thumb is to ignore bookies' specials.

    I agree with TSE 0-2 are value, prefer 1-2 than 0 though. Don't think Ladbrokes have enough in for it being early in the parliament.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,945
    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.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,072
    Taz said:

    TOPPING said:

    Taz said:

    1st like HTS

    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.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,040

    Taz said:

    TOPPING said:

    Taz said:

    1st like HTS

    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.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,553
    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.
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 620

    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.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 63,101

    Nigelb said:

    Betting rule of thumb is to ignore bookies' specials.

    I agree with TSE 0-2 are value, prefer 1-2 than 0 though. Don't think Ladbrokes have enough in for it being early in the parliament.
    5000/1 for Farage to be PM in 2025 is more like it.

    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?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,945
    boulay said:

    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 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 :dizzy:
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,072
    Taz said:
    $200 million…
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585
    Given that Tesla is almost the only US game in town I don't find it surprising..
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    Taz said:
    $200 million…
    670.8MWh of capacity..
  • boulay said:

    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.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857
    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.
  • RattersRatters Posts: 1,110
    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.
  • franklynfranklyn Posts: 322
    Just looking back at Al Murray's campaign in the 2015 Thanet South by election
    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
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857

    boulay said:

    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..."
  • Shecorns88Shecorns88 Posts: 270
    algarkirk said:

    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...
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,373
    Who would have thought in July, crossover between Lab and Con would have happened by the end of the year?

    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! :D
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,967
    Ah, ‘special’ markets again.

    Never trust a bookie who offers only one side of a bet!
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,945
    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.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,166
    edited December 10
    algarkirk said:

    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.

    And yet there has not been a line by line review of departmental spending for seventeen years, reportedly.
    https://news.sky.com/story/bankers-to-scrutinise-public-sector-spending-to-bring-private-sector-into-the-heart-of-government-13270580
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,166
    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
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    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
  • DopermeanDopermean Posts: 620
    Nigelb said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.

    And yet there has not been a line by line review of departmental spending for seventeen years, reportedly.
    https://news.sky.com/story/bankers-to-scrutinise-public-sector-spending-to-bring-private-sector-into-the-heart-of-government-13270580
    Doesn't bode well, they'll just be looking for outsourcing opportunities, which is likely to result in increased costs/worst performance.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,967
    Nigelb said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.

    And yet there has not been a line by line review of departmental spending for seventeen years, reportedly.
    https://news.sky.com/story/bankers-to-scrutinise-public-sector-spending-to-bring-private-sector-into-the-heart-of-government-13270580
    British DOGE!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,956
    edited December 10
    HYUFD said:

    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.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,004

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 22,158
    boulay said:

    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?

    Disappointing.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,166
    Dopermean said:

    Nigelb said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.

    And yet there has not been a line by line review of departmental spending for seventeen years, reportedly.
    https://news.sky.com/story/bankers-to-scrutinise-public-sector-spending-to-bring-private-sector-into-the-heart-of-government-13270580
    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.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864

    HYUFD said:

    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
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 72,166
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.

    And yet there has not been a line by line review of departmental spending for seventeen years, reportedly.
    https://news.sky.com/story/bankers-to-scrutinise-public-sector-spending-to-bring-private-sector-into-the-heart-of-government-13270580
    British DOGE!
    I'm equally sceptical about that, though for slightly different reasons.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,956

    algarkirk said:

    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.

  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,140
    Sandpit said:

    Ah, ‘special’ markets again.

    Never trust a bookie who offers only one side of a bet!

    Nothing to do with trust just about understanding.

    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.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,072
    algarkirk said:

    boulay said:

    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.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,403
    Nigelb said:

    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

    It's OK, Israel is a democracy.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,072
    Scott_xP said:
    Depends - Tesla also make them in the US.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,934
    algarkirk said:

    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
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,072
    algarkirk said:

    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.

    What’s that word? Aus…. Something?

    George Osborne to the Blue courtesy phone…
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,072
    Taz said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.”
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    Nigelb said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.

    And yet there has not been a line by line review of departmental spending for seventeen years, reportedly.
    https://news.sky.com/story/bankers-to-scrutinise-public-sector-spending-to-bring-private-sector-into-the-heart-of-government-13270580
    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
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,403

    algarkirk said:

    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)
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    GIN1138 said:

    Who would have thought in July, crossover between Lab and Con would have happened by the end of the year?

    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! :D

    Since KB took the reins there have been 16 polls. Labour are ahead in 10 the Tories 6. Of those six all but one are from the same pollster.

    .....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.

  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,068
    algarkirk said:

    boulay said:

    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.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,931
    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    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.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,956

    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 ?
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,931
    edited December 10

    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?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,423

    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'. ;)
  • kamskikamski Posts: 5,208
    Pro_Rata said:

    kamski said:

    The Guardian has a profile of likely next German Chancellor Friedrich Merz

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/10/who-is-friedrich-merz-germany-next-chancellor-scholz-merkel

    which conspicuously fails to mention how very unpopular Merz is.

    For example, this poll from a couple of days ago

    https://www.zeit.de/politik/deutschland/2024-12/olaf-scholz-friedrich-merz-zdf-politbarometer-fast-gleichauf

    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.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,324
    Taz said:

    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.
  • theProletheProle Posts: 1,226
    edited December 10
    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    edited December 10
    kamski said:

    Pro_Rata said:

    kamski said:

    The Guardian has a profile of likely next German Chancellor Friedrich Merz

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/2024/dec/10/who-is-friedrich-merz-germany-next-chancellor-scholz-merkel

    which conspicuously fails to mention how very unpopular Merz is.

    For example, this poll from a couple of days ago

    https://www.zeit.de/politik/deutschland/2024-12/olaf-scholz-friedrich-merz-zdf-politbarometer-fast-gleichauf

    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

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,324

    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.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,220
    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,068
    kjh said:

    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?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 123,864
    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    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
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,072
    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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…
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,682
    Cookie said:

    kjh said:

    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.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,140
    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,413
    Tom Hamilton on Kemi Badenoch: https://dividinglines.substack.com/p/let-it-go

    He argues that Badenoch keeps tripping herself up through an inability to ignore provocations, and thus lands herself with poor messaging.
  • Shecorns88Shecorns88 Posts: 270
    Taz said:

    algarkirk said:

    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



  • bondegezoubondegezou Posts: 11,413

    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • CookieCookie Posts: 14,068
    tlg86 said:

    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • kinabalukinabalu Posts: 42,630
    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,931
    Cookie said:

    kjh said:

    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.
  • Pulpstar said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857
    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,072

    Pulpstar said:

    algarkirk said:

    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…
  • theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • Shecorns88Shecorns88 Posts: 270

    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.



  • eekeek Posts: 28,585

    Taz said:

    algarkirk said:

    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
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,140

    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,471
    Surprised to see that Nick Candy has joined Reform.
    I thought that all the super wealthy had left the country.
  • kjhkjh Posts: 11,931
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    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.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,423
    kjh said:

    Cookie said:

    kjh said:

    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.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,220
    Cookie said:

    tlg86 said:

    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,934
    Carnyx said:

    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:

    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.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857
    HYUFD said:

    kjh said:

    HYUFD said:

    HYUFD said:

    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.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,934
    Cookie said:

    algarkirk said:

    boulay said:

    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...
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857

    Carnyx said:

    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:

    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.
    Yes. often seen them on Mull. They are however begining to undelight Scottish sheep farmers.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,072

    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
    Nope - think it might have been under Major.

    The boasting email leaked, of course.
  • Shecorns88Shecorns88 Posts: 270

    Tom Hamilton on Kemi Badenoch: https://dividinglines.substack.com/p/let-it-go

    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..

    Jesus how the Tories need Penny Mordaunt
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,967
    tlg86 said:

    Cookie said:

    tlg86 said:

    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • algarkirkalgarkirk Posts: 12,857

    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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.
  • noneoftheabovenoneoftheabove Posts: 23,140

    Surprised to see that Nick Candy has joined Reform.
    I thought that all the super wealthy had left the country.

    It is certainly sweet news for Reform and there is no sugar coating this for the Tories.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,423

    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?
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 51,072
    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    Cookie said:

    tlg86 said:

    theProle said:

    algarkirk said:

    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

    The test of good management is to call out on 2)
This discussion has been closed.