We'll probably get polls this year with Reform first, the Tories second and Labour third. The next election could be an extinction level event for Labour.
Or Reform way ahead and Labour and the Tories battling for 2nd, or Reform 1st, Labour 2nd and the Tories down in the mid teens
Major volatility. The Great Vibeshift is hitting the UK as it is hitting every western nation, the entire West is swinging hard right
You can feel it in the air. Sudden optimism, the long dismal night of liberal wankery, the Narnian winter of Wokeness, is slowly coming to an end
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
It really does look like the budget is unravelling this week, it took an extra month or two vs Liz Truss but the additional £150bn in borrowing hasn't gone unnoticed by markets. Yes every other country has higher yields, the difference is that the UK has seen yields go up significantly more than any other country as markets reprice our debt to the new reality of much more supply over the short and medium term than had been anticipated alongside much higher inflation and interest rate expectations for the UK which is definitely a problem created by Reeves.
As I said before, we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis and the government will have to pull back on spending commitments to keep bond investors happy. I'd suggest junking the Chagos deal, the CCS money and cutting by 2/3rds the extra money for the NHS just to start and then going in for departmental headcount cuts of 20-30% for non customer facing roles and banning consultancy and agency workers across the state with pay bracket increases for highly technical or skilled roles.
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
On current polling Streeting loses at next election unless he does a "chicken run" to a safe seat.
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
On current polling Streeting loses at next election unless he does a "chicken run" to a safe seat.
Yes you're right. Labour probably very vulnerable on their left flank in the big cities. I'd suggest Cooper as an alternate but she's surely gone to Reform on these numbers. Reeves will be irreparably holed below the water line with Starmer, Lammy isn't a credible grand coalition PM. Surely Starmer can't stay on with such a defeat lol. Anyone else credible on the right of Labour to be PM for the grand coalition option ?
Badenoch might chuck her lot in as junior partner to Reform, on these numbers even though it's not a majority the Sinners basically ensure the QS won't be defeated.
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
More likely a Lab-LD minority coalition. Cons would be signing their death warrant to join that. But getting much done would be extremely difficult, except electoral reform ironically. Second election within 12-18 months.
I'd feel for the King trying to pick between those two possible coalitions.
There isn't one. REF+CON is less than 300. LAB+LIB+SNP is less than 325. LAB+LIB+SNP at 315(?) is probably the be the best bet and would last for a couple of years, but would kill the LIBs like last time. It's a bit like Germany 1930...which I wish I hadn't just thought of
It has to be Reform now, you know you want to. The Tories are done, finished, nixed. They cannot be forgiven for the Boriswave, and they can’t be trusted to do anything actually rightwing, most of them are actually Cameroon Lib Dems anyway. Fuck them and let them die
Reform it is. Let’s have a proper right wing government, no more ersatz shit. A government that will destroy Woke and sort immigration and act like it’s just got out of the gym and it’s had three gins and it’s ready to RUCK, and then have a nice Penang curry
You are even older than me, so old enough to remember the SDP. They were going to "break the mould" and replace Labour, and for those who remember Spitting Image they may remember David Steele saying "Oh David I feel the surge, the surge." The surge was a bit premature.
It has to be Reform now, you know you want to. The Tories are done, finished, nixed. They cannot be forgiven for the Boriswave, and they can’t be trusted to do anything actually rightwing, most of them are actually Cameroon Lib Dems anyway. Fuck them and let them die
Reform it is. Let’s have a proper right wing government, no more ersatz shit. A government that will destroy Woke and sort immigration and act like it’s just got out of the gym and it’s had three gins and it’s ready to RUCK, and then have a nice Penang curry
I think Reform (in office) would be shit and they're economically statist.
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
More likely a Lab-LD minority coalition. Cons would be signing their death warrant to join that. But getting much done would be extremely difficult, except electoral reform ironically. Second election within 12-18 months.
The LD's and Reform would have appetite for Electoral Reform, would Labour though ? Unless a strict manifest pledge. There are many in Labour who still oppose it.
The boss of the CBI, on the Politico Power Play podcast has warned Elon Musk he will have to “come through me first” in an extraordinary defence of home office minister Jess Phillips.
What a doofus. I am sure she needs a bald, middle aged man in a suit acting as her saviour !!!!
He should be focusing on business and industry not this nonsense.
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
On current polling Streeting loses at next election unless he does a "chicken run" to a safe seat.
Up until the end of the Second World War, anybody who fell outside of the cultural norm — white, British and Christian — was a novelty and would have lived in the full knowledge that they did not represent the municipal mainstream. The experience of London before the Second World War resembled modern monocultural Tokyo far more than it resembled modern multicultural New York...
For the first time in history, London’s permanent population is culturally, ethnically and religiously diverse, sharing little in common with the country it governs. This change was recent, rapid and remarkable. It is strange that we acknowledge it so rarely, and it would be ludicrous to assume that it has had no bearing on life in the city. Most Londoners know, regardless of whether they admit it, that crime has risen steeply. Certain areas of the city are effectively off-limits after dark...
The sticking-plaster solution is to engineer a new founding myth through brute-force messaging: London is, always has been and always will be multicultural. Londoners have always prided themselves on their pluralism and tolerance. This was inevitable. It cannot — must not — be questioned.
"In 1851, over 38 percent were born somewhere else." "by 1901 the proportion of Londoners born elsewhere had declined to just 33 percent of the total" "The 1901 census recorded 33,000 Londoners as having been born in British colonies or dependencies."
Does it make a difference if the "somewhere else" is Lincolnshire or Lagos?
The cultural gap between 1851 rural Lincolnshire and London would have been quite big. Throughout the last two hundred years there have been tensions between newcomers and born and bred Londoners, whether huguenots, Irish, Jewish, Caribbean, Eastern European, Asian or African. Mostly low level with occasional times where it ramps up. Over time the newcomers become the born and bred, then a different set of new people arrive. Is it different, sure, does it alter that dynamic significantly, probably not.
There are so many Welsh and Irish names in London, Welsh particularly.
I've always got the feeling that so many people arriving from Wales must have been one of the biggest changes for people since the Normans. I don't see that much written about this, though.
For a couple of years I sort-of commuted between a shift-work job in London and home in the west, so travelling at different times of day. One stand-out characteristic was that the trains coming from Wales were always full, whilst the trains going to Wales were never full. It always puzzled me - why wasn't Wales gradually getting emptier?
I think hat trains at the start of their journey are less full than at their end?
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
More likely a Lab-LD minority coalition. Cons would be signing their death warrant to join that. But getting much done would be extremely difficult, except electoral reform ironically. Second election within 12-18 months.
There are some advantages in political stasis. The rachet has to stop and governments can stop interfering!
Easy spending cut for Labour is £9bn to Mauritius.
But it's virtue spending as a luxury belief for them to show how wonderful they are. So I imagine it'll be sacred.
There have been more consultations/murmurings about Leeds getting a tram system. I expect this to be cancelled. Yet again (not party political, it's happened under them all, repeatedly).
To be fair, trams are just expensive and inflexible buses, that disrupt the city for many years while the streets are dug up to put the rails in. A metro system is the way to go, particularly for the centre - it can run above ground elsewhere.
Getting it built would require changes to processes though. The majority of the cost is in regulation.
Metros are even more expensive.
Trams can run on lower energy, due to reduced coefficient of friction, and be electrified and pull longer/heavier loads; they are also more reliable than buses.
Metros are only more expensive in terms of the costs to build and run. But they move a lot more people (and cause less disruption) so in terms of passenger usage they're better value.
And there's quite a lot in that on terms of being more expensive to build and run. It can be billions on the first and tens of millions on the second. Economics depends on the density of the population to drive revenue and the difficultly of construction to serve it, and hence why you run a business case.
In medium sized cities trams make more sense. Large cities metros. Small places, buses.
Not to go the full Liam Neeson, but I do this for a living.
Indeed. And Leeds is a large enough city.
You could also add smart buses to even smaller places / more rural / less dense / low-demand times. The broad concept of public transport of 'we run where we say, when we say' is out of the stagecoach era. Technology allows a much more user-focused approach now, if providers and regulators can get together to develop and introduce the software.
You don't like trams, and would prefer a metro - I get that - but that does not a business case make. Public transport works well where there is a latent demand for travel along the route - it isn't done in a vacuum - and if you can get below 10 minute gaps in service and operate 18 hours a day (big ifs, of course) you don't need a timetable.
Also, people tend not to like buses for all of reliability, service quality, and privacy/ safety/ social reasons. Uber is far closer to the user-focuses transport you crave these days, but has scattered coverage outside London.
Correct. And one bus every 2-3 hours during the daytime is barely a service at all.
It should be perfectly possible to essentially order a bus in the same way as an Uber to take you from A to B, but potentially via C, D and E, as the bus picks up and drops off passengers via a smartphone app, with the driver given a real-time amended route as people order the service. You could run these both in rural areas and at low-demand times everywhere, linked to a smartcard for both the user's and the operator's security.
Obviously it would need a subsidy but then so do pretty much all services in those places and at that time.
Services such as you describe exist. But they don't, so far, do very well. They have neither the simplicity or an uber nor the, er, simplicity of a bus (which we could also call predictability, or ease of understanding). Users of public transport LOVE simplicity above anything else. Require them to think, and they will shift to the simpler alternative. One of the reasons fixed track does so well is simplicity. Users know where it's going - it follows the rails - they don't worry about where to get off. Introduce any sort of uncertainty into a bus journey at your peril.
I'm not going as far as saying you're wrong - as I say, such services exist, though tend to run at large losses - but they are not what the world is clamouring for, yet. It will take a bit of a shift in mindset, which is hard to do.
I think they're under-developed. They would only really work if combined with an overarching framework - hence the need for a single point of use app, which handles the ordering, real-time info, payment etc.
The world won't clamour for these services - as CR says upthread, metros, trams and scheduled buses all have their time and place - but for places and times when usage is low, it's a niche to be filled. And, of course, the framework app they operate within could (and should) be the same one that does all the other transport in the area so users already have familiarity.
And did keep pointing out to Doubting Thomas/HYUFD that the trend is the point of interest, not his read of a single poll which he can manipulate to “nothing to see here”.
The trend is clear - LabCon are freewheeling downwards. Unless something changes both in terms of personnel and performance it’s hard to see when that might change.
Reform need to do many many things. One being to learn how parliament works. They need to know how to be effective as an opposition and not just agitate.
We'll probably get polls this year with Reform first, the Tories second and Labour third. The next election could be an extinction level event for Labour.
Or Reform way ahead and Labour and the Tories battling for 2nd, or Reform 1st, Labour 2nd and the Tories down in the mid teens
Major volatility. The Great Vibeshift is hitting the UK as it is hitting every western nation, the entire West is swinging hard right
You can feel it in the air. Sudden optimism, the long dismal night of liberal wankery, the Narnian winter of Wokeness, is slowly coming to an end
Or Labour recover, and the right-wing vote consolidates behind...?
That's the real extinction level event for the Conservatives. If Reform become the main opposition even when Labour are >30%.
The boss of the CBI, on the Politico Power Play podcast has warned Elon Musk he will have to “come through me first” in an extraordinary defence of home office minister Jess Phillips.
What a doofus. I am sure she needs a bald, middle aged man in a suit acting as her saviour !!!!
He should be focusing on business and industry not this nonsense.
Not really. I disapprove of multibillionaires trying to buy British politics. I'm funny like that.
I am not keen on it myself. However our politicians were happy with it when they were the recipients of the largesse. It is an issue now it is Musk and Reform. He is not complaining about Musk trying to buy our politics, if that is what he is going to do, he is not happy about his comment about Phillips and is responding with some absurd macho posturing.
The "he's got to come through me first" nonsense. He sounds like some post pubescent teen defending his bird on a night out down the local Spoons.
I find that I get noticeably more right wing about 20 minutes after I’ve been to the gym; the effect lasts about 90 minutes
I’m tempted to say how would one tell.
What’s the ceiling, work camps and rubber truncheons or full Herrenvolk?
I peak at full Remigration after about an hour? Interestingly if I just do weights I only reach “national service and tow the boats to fucking Belgium” - but it lasts longer
It might explain why "peak reactionary" is probably around your age (early 60s?). As people get into their 70s they stop going to the gym so much and their testosterone declines and they are less angry with the world.
That’s actually an interesting point. Old people should get more mellow and centrist as testosterone diminishes with age. But maybe that process is countered by increasing bitterness at being old?
Personally I have no intention of ageing and intend to get even more Nazi AND happier into my 90s. Doing quite well so far
My theory is that people don't get more right-wing as they age at all, it's just that society gradually becomes more left-wing.
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
More likely a Lab-LD minority coalition. Cons would be signing their death warrant to join that. But getting much done would be extremely difficult, except electoral reform ironically. Second election within 12-18 months.
There are some advantages in political stasis. The rachet has to stop and governments can stop interfering!
Would the SNP block a Reform-Con coalition if this really was the result? They could offer confidence and supply.
Would serve their independence purposes surely to have a very right wing, reactionary UK government?
I'd feel for the King trying to pick between those two possible coalitions.
He wouldn't have to. That's not how it works.
If that was the result of the election then Starmer remains PM until he either resigns, loses a Confidence vote in the House or is replaced as Labour leader. There is no need for the Kind to intervene proactively.
If he resigns or loses in the House, then convention is to call on the LotO to try to form a government though with this kind of result, it would be better for a proxy on behalf of the King to take soundings on who, in the absence of the outgoing PM, would have the best chance of holding the House's confidence. But if those soundings produce no positive outcome then the call goes to Farage.
Thinking of the Liz Truss suing Keir Starmer thing, although at the moment it's just a Cease and Desist - do we actually have any examples of active politicians going through with a Defamation Action to verdict - even against a PM?
I'm sure people here will know some.
The closest major recent one I have in my mind is Anna Turley XMP who sued Len McClusterfuck, which cost Unite the Union north of £1m rather than a free apology they had been offered.
My MP Lee Anderson had a couple, but they petered out.
It has to be Reform now, you know you want to. The Tories are done, finished, nixed. They cannot be forgiven for the Boriswave, and they can’t be trusted to do anything actually rightwing, most of them are actually Cameroon Lib Dems anyway. Fuck them and let them die
Reform it is. Let’s have a proper right wing government, no more ersatz shit. A government that will destroy Woke and sort immigration and act like it’s just got out of the gym and it’s had three gins and it’s ready to RUCK, and then have a nice Penang curry
You are even older than me, so old enough to remember the SDP. They were going to "break the mould" and replace Labour, and for those who remember Spitting Image they may remember David Steele saying "Oh David I feel the surge, the surge." The surge was a bit premature.
It really does look like the budget is unravelling this week, it took an extra month or two vs Liz Truss but the additional £150bn in borrowing hasn't gone unnoticed by markets. Yes every other country has higher yields, the difference is that the UK has seen yields go up significantly more than any other country as markets reprice our debt to the new reality of much more supply over the short and medium term than had been anticipated alongside much higher inflation and interest rate expectations for the UK which is definitely a problem created by Reeves.
As I said before, we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis and the government will have to pull back on spending commitments to keep bond investors happy. I'd suggest junking the Chagos deal, the CCS money and cutting by 2/3rds the extra money for the NHS just to start and then going in for departmental headcount cuts of 20-30% for non customer facing roles and banning consultancy and agency workers across the state with pay bracket increases for highly technical or skilled roles.
Easy spending cut for Labour is £9bn to Mauritius.
But it's virtue spending as a luxury belief for them to show how wonderful they are. So I imagine it'll be sacred.
There have been more consultations/murmurings about Leeds getting a tram system. I expect this to be cancelled. Yet again (not party political, it's happened under them all, repeatedly).
To be fair, trams are just expensive and inflexible buses, that disrupt the city for many years while the streets are dug up to put the rails in. A metro system is the way to go, particularly for the centre - it can run above ground elsewhere.
Getting it built would require changes to processes though. The majority of the cost is in regulation.
Metros are even more expensive.
Trams can run on lower energy, due to reduced coefficient of friction, and be electrified and pull longer/heavier loads; they are also more reliable than buses.
Metros are only more expensive in terms of the costs to build and run. But they move a lot more people (and cause less disruption) so in terms of passenger usage they're better value.
And there's quite a lot in that on terms of being more expensive to build and run. It can be billions on the first and tens of millions on the second. Economics depends on the density of the population to drive revenue and the difficultly of construction to serve it, and hence why you run a business case.
In medium sized cities trams make more sense. Large cities metros. Small places, buses.
Not to go the full Liam Neeson, but I do this for a living.
Indeed. And Leeds is a large enough city.
You could also add smart buses to even smaller places / more rural / less dense / low-demand times. The broad concept of public transport of 'we run where we say, when we say' is out of the stagecoach era. Technology allows a much more user-focused approach now, if providers and regulators can get together to develop and introduce the software.
You don't like trams, and would prefer a metro - I get that - but that does not a business case make. Public transport works well where there is a latent demand for travel along the route - it isn't done in a vacuum - and if you can get below 10 minute gaps in service and operate 18 hours a day (big ifs, of course) you don't need a timetable.
Also, people tend not to like buses for all of reliability, service quality, and privacy/ safety/ social reasons. Uber is far closer to the user-focuses transport you crave these days, but has scattered coverage outside London.
Correct. And one bus every 2-3 hours during the daytime is barely a service at all.
It should be perfectly possible to essentially order a bus in the same way as an Uber to take you from A to B, but potentially via C, D and E, as the bus picks up and drops off passengers via a smartphone app, with the driver given a real-time amended route as people order the service. You could run these both in rural areas and at low-demand times everywhere, linked to a smartcard for both the user's and the operator's security.
Obviously it would need a subsidy but then so do pretty much all services in those places and at that time.
Services such as you describe exist. But they don't, so far, do very well. They have neither the simplicity or an uber nor the, er, simplicity of a bus (which we could also call predictability, or ease of understanding). Users of public transport LOVE simplicity above anything else. Require them to think, and they will shift to the simpler alternative. One of the reasons fixed track does so well is simplicity. Users know where it's going - it follows the rails - they don't worry about where to get off. Introduce any sort of uncertainty into a bus journey at your peril.
I'm not going as far as saying you're wrong - as I say, such services exist, though tend to run at large losses - but they are not what the world is clamouring for, yet. It will take a bit of a shift in mindset, which is hard to do.
I think they're under-developed. They would only really work if combined with an overarching framework - hence the need for a single point of use app, which handles the ordering, real-time info, payment etc.
The world won't clamour for these services - as CR says upthread, metros, trams and scheduled buses all have their time and place - but for places and times when usage is low, it's a niche to be filled. And, of course, the framework app they operate within could (and should) be the same one that does all the other transport in the area so users already have familiarity.
I am a great believer in public transport, and am personally willing to overcome the barriers of complexity. I reckon of all car owners I'm in the top 1 percentile of my willingness to use public transport. I haven't got a taxi for over two years.
However, I abhor living life through apps.
So personally, I reckon this one wouldn't be for me.
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
More likely a Lab-LD minority coalition. Cons would be signing their death warrant to join that. But getting much done would be extremely difficult, except electoral reform ironically. Second election within 12-18 months.
The LD's and Reform would have appetite for Electoral Reform, would Labour though ? Unless a strict manifest pledge. There are many in Labour who still oppose it.
There are plenty in Labour who approve though, as evidenced by the conference vote, and the LDs could make it a condition of support.
But Labour would also have to be mindful that FPTP had delivered them one majority in six elections at that point, but did have the potential to give Reform a majority, possibly a stonking one if the cards fell right for them in a very diverse field. I think the various pressures would be enough to tip Labour into backing the change.
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
More likely a Lab-LD minority coalition. Cons would be signing their death warrant to join that. But getting much done would be extremely difficult, except electoral reform ironically. Second election within 12-18 months.
There are some advantages in political stasis. The rachet has to stop and governments can stop interfering!
Would the SNP block a Reform-Con coalition if this really was the result? They could offer confidence and supply.
Would serve their independence purposes surely to have a very right wing, reactionary UK government?
Possibly. There are some reactionary similarities between the separatist movements and the mindset of UKIP/Brexit/Reform. Though I think it unlikely!
I'd feel for the King trying to pick between those two possible coalitions.
He wouldn't have to. That's not how it works.
If that was the result of the election then Starmer remains PM until he either resigns, loses a Confidence vote in the House or is replaced as Labour leader. There is no need for the Kind to intervene proactively.
If he resigns or loses in the House, then convention is to call on the LotO to try to form a government though with this kind of result, it would be better for a proxy on behalf of the King to take soundings on who, in the absence of the outgoing PM, would have the best chance of holding the House's confidence. But if those soundings produce no positive outcome then the call goes to Farage.
I thought the precedent from 2010 was that the leader of the largest party got first dibs at forming a government? And then the monarch would assess it's viability compared with the current one.
Brown bounced Cameron into Downing Street before he'd actually made the proposal to the Queen.
It has to be Reform now, you know you want to. The Tories are done, finished, nixed. They cannot be forgiven for the Boriswave, and they can’t be trusted to do anything actually rightwing, most of them are actually Cameroon Lib Dems anyway. Fuck them and let them die
Reform it is. Let’s have a proper right wing government, no more ersatz shit. A government that will destroy Woke and sort immigration and act like it’s just got out of the gym and it’s had three gins and it’s ready to RUCK, and then have a nice Penang curry
You are even older than me, so old enough to remember the SDP. They were going to "break the mould" and replace Labour, and for those who remember Spitting Image they may remember David Steele saying "Oh David I feel the surge, the surge." The surge was a bit premature.
Easy spending cut for Labour is £9bn to Mauritius.
But it's virtue spending as a luxury belief for them to show how wonderful they are. So I imagine it'll be sacred.
There have been more consultations/murmurings about Leeds getting a tram system. I expect this to be cancelled. Yet again (not party political, it's happened under them all, repeatedly).
To be fair, trams are just expensive and inflexible buses, that disrupt the city for many years while the streets are dug up to put the rails in. A metro system is the way to go, particularly for the centre - it can run above ground elsewhere.
Getting it built would require changes to processes though. The majority of the cost is in regulation.
Metros are even more expensive.
Trams can run on lower energy, due to reduced coefficient of friction, and be electrified and pull longer/heavier loads; they are also more reliable than buses.
Metros are only more expensive in terms of the costs to build and run. But they move a lot more people (and cause less disruption) so in terms of passenger usage they're better value.
And there's quite a lot in that on terms of being more expensive to build and run. It can be billions on the first and tens of millions on the second. Economics depends on the density of the population to drive revenue and the difficultly of construction to serve it, and hence why you run a business case.
In medium sized cities trams make more sense. Large cities metros. Small places, buses.
Not to go the full Liam Neeson, but I do this for a living.
Indeed. And Leeds is a large enough city.
You could also add smart buses to even smaller places / more rural / less dense / low-demand times. The broad concept of public transport of 'we run where we say, when we say' is out of the stagecoach era. Technology allows a much more user-focused approach now, if providers and regulators can get together to develop and introduce the software.
You don't like trams, and would prefer a metro - I get that - but that does not a business case make. Public transport works well where there is a latent demand for travel along the route - it isn't done in a vacuum - and if you can get below 10 minute gaps in service and operate 18 hours a day (big ifs, of course) you don't need a timetable.
Also, people tend not to like buses for all of reliability, service quality, and privacy/ safety/ social reasons. Uber is far closer to the user-focuses transport you crave these days, but has scattered coverage outside London.
Correct. And one bus every 2-3 hours during the daytime is barely a service at all.
It should be perfectly possible to essentially order a bus in the same way as an Uber to take you from A to B, but potentially via C, D and E, as the bus picks up and drops off passengers via a smartphone app, with the driver given a real-time amended route as people order the service. You could run these both in rural areas and at low-demand times everywhere, linked to a smartcard for both the user's and the operator's security.
Obviously it would need a subsidy but then so do pretty much all services in those places and at that time.
Services such as you describe exist. But they don't, so far, do very well. They have neither the simplicity or an uber nor the, er, simplicity of a bus (which we could also call predictability, or ease of understanding). Users of public transport LOVE simplicity above anything else. Require them to think, and they will shift to the simpler alternative. One of the reasons fixed track does so well is simplicity. Users know where it's going - it follows the rails - they don't worry about where to get off. Introduce any sort of uncertainty into a bus journey at your peril.
I'm not going as far as saying you're wrong - as I say, such services exist, though tend to run at large losses - but they are not what the world is clamouring for, yet. It will take a bit of a shift in mindset, which is hard to do.
I think they're under-developed. They would only really work if combined with an overarching framework - hence the need for a single point of use app, which handles the ordering, real-time info, payment etc.
The world won't clamour for these services - as CR says upthread, metros, trams and scheduled buses all have their time and place - but for places and times when usage is low, it's a niche to be filled. And, of course, the framework app they operate within could (and should) be the same one that does all the other transport in the area so users already have familiarity.
I am a great believer in public transport, and am personally willing to overcome the barriers of complexity. I reckon of all car owners I'm in the top 1 percentile of my willingness to use public transport. I haven't got a taxi for over two years.
However, I abhor living life through apps.
So personally, I reckon this one wouldn't be for me.
But that's just a personal view.
Which is fair enough. But then you have a car and therefore the choice of when to use it. On the other hand, if you don't have a car but live in a rural village, or live in the suburbs but work a 5am-1pm shift, it's the sort of thing that could prove hugely beneficial, I'd have thought.
I'd feel for the King trying to pick between those two possible coalitions.
He wouldn't have to. That's not how it works.
If that was the result of the election then Starmer remains PM until he either resigns, loses a Confidence vote in the House or is replaced as Labour leader. There is no need for the Kind to intervene proactively.
If he resigns or loses in the House, then convention is to call on the LotO to try to form a government though with this kind of result, it would be better for a proxy on behalf of the King to take soundings on who, in the absence of the outgoing PM, would have the best chance of holding the House's confidence. But if those soundings produce no positive outcome then the call goes to Farage.
Yeh, Starmer could remain in post and dare them to pass a no confidence vote or reject a budget knowing Farage would likely be PM otherwise.
It has to be Reform now, you know you want to. The Tories are done, finished, nixed. They cannot be forgiven for the Boriswave, and they can’t be trusted to do anything actually rightwing, most of them are actually Cameroon Lib Dems anyway. Fuck them and let them die
Reform it is. Let’s have a proper right wing government, no more ersatz shit. A government that will destroy Woke and sort immigration and act like it’s just got out of the gym and it’s had three gins and it’s ready to RUCK, and then have a nice Penang curry
You are even older than me, so old enough to remember the SDP. They were going to "break the mould" and replace Labour, and for those who remember Spitting Image they may remember David Steele saying "Oh David I feel the surge, the surge." The surge was a bit premature.
The SDP is still around, though is Reform Light these days and, if it has any sense (which is doubtful given it *has* kept going so long), will fold into it soon enough.
But the Liberal-SDP alliance led polls through late 1981-82, peaking at 50%, so did stand a very real chance of winning outright. Indeed, the tipping point was probably not the Falklands, which propelled the Tories back into the lead, but Healey edging out Benn for Labour's deputy leadership. Had that election gone the other way, it would likely have produced a further tide of defections which may well have cemented the SDP's primacy on the left. But such are the footprints in the shores of history.
Obviously, if Reform did win then they'd flounder hopelessly, screw everything up and blame someone else; that's what radical parties do. but they could win.
It has to be Reform now, you know you want to. The Tories are done, finished, nixed. They cannot be forgiven for the Boriswave, and they can’t be trusted to do anything actually rightwing, most of them are actually Cameroon Lib Dems anyway. Fuck them and let them die
Reform it is. Let’s have a proper right wing government, no more ersatz shit. A government that will destroy Woke and sort immigration and act like it’s just got out of the gym and it’s had three gins and it’s ready to RUCK, and then have a nice Penang curry
I think Reform (in office) would be shit and they're economically statist.
Not quite my cup of tea.
I suspect that if you asked their four MPs, Reform would have four different notions on what to do with the economy.
They are probably the one party that could make Labour's economic management look coherent and capable in comparison. No mean feat.
Labour, the @bankofengland and the media establishment smeared my budget and forced a reversal.
Now, they've plunged the country into economic crisis.
Is she going to get a 'cease and desist' letter now?
Test case for the OSA?
Truss is very upset. The posts/comments are deliberately designed to upset Truss and are done in the full knowledge of upsetting Truss. Truth is not a relevant criteria.
Truss sends lawyer's letter to Starmer about the crashing of the economy under her leadership.
Labour HQ: Yippee!!!! And we were having such a shit couple of weeks!!
True if the current figures were even a patch above what they were after the minibudget fiasco, or people felt better off. They're not, and they don't, so I think Truss has timed her letter very well.
'Incidentally, since there has been much debate around so-called Slapps (strategic lawsuits against public participation), much of the ostensible concern about which has been raised by Conservative politicians in recent years (as well as outlets such as the Guardian), it is perhaps worth pointing out that Truss’s letter is a textbook example of a Slapp.'
Easy spending cut for Labour is £9bn to Mauritius.
But it's virtue spending as a luxury belief for them to show how wonderful they are. So I imagine it'll be sacred.
There have been more consultations/murmurings about Leeds getting a tram system. I expect this to be cancelled. Yet again (not party political, it's happened under them all, repeatedly).
To be fair, trams are just expensive and inflexible buses, that disrupt the city for many years while the streets are dug up to put the rails in. A metro system is the way to go, particularly for the centre - it can run above ground elsewhere.
Getting it built would require changes to processes though. The majority of the cost is in regulation.
Metros are even more expensive.
Trams can run on lower energy, due to reduced coefficient of friction, and be electrified and pull longer/heavier loads; they are also more reliable than buses.
Metros are only more expensive in terms of the costs to build and run. But they move a lot more people (and cause less disruption) so in terms of passenger usage they're better value.
And there's quite a lot in that on terms of being more expensive to build and run. It can be billions on the first and tens of millions on the second. Economics depends on the density of the population to drive revenue and the difficultly of construction to serve it, and hence why you run a business case.
In medium sized cities trams make more sense. Large cities metros. Small places, buses.
Not to go the full Liam Neeson, but I do this for a living.
Indeed. And Leeds is a large enough city.
You could also add smart buses to even smaller places / more rural / less dense / low-demand times. The broad concept of public transport of 'we run where we say, when we say' is out of the stagecoach era. Technology allows a much more user-focused approach now, if providers and regulators can get together to develop and introduce the software.
You don't like trams, and would prefer a metro - I get that - but that does not a business case make. Public transport works well where there is a latent demand for travel along the route - it isn't done in a vacuum - and if you can get below 10 minute gaps in service and operate 18 hours a day (big ifs, of course) you don't need a timetable.
Also, people tend not to like buses for all of reliability, service quality, and privacy/ safety/ social reasons. Uber is far closer to the user-focuses transport you crave these days, but has scattered coverage outside London.
Correct. And one bus every 2-3 hours during the daytime is barely a service at all.
It should be perfectly possible to essentially order a bus in the same way as an Uber to take you from A to B, but potentially via C, D and E, as the bus picks up and drops off passengers via a smartphone app, with the driver given a real-time amended route as people order the service. You could run these both in rural areas and at low-demand times everywhere, linked to a smartcard for both the user's and the operator's security.
Obviously it would need a subsidy but then so do pretty much all services in those places and at that time.
Services such as you describe exist. But they don't, so far, do very well. They have neither the simplicity or an uber nor the, er, simplicity of a bus (which we could also call predictability, or ease of understanding). Users of public transport LOVE simplicity above anything else. Require them to think, and they will shift to the simpler alternative. One of the reasons fixed track does so well is simplicity. Users know where it's going - it follows the rails - they don't worry about where to get off. Introduce any sort of uncertainty into a bus journey at your peril.
I'm not going as far as saying you're wrong - as I say, such services exist, though tend to run at large losses - but they are not what the world is clamouring for, yet. It will take a bit of a shift in mindset, which is hard to do.
I think they're under-developed. They would only really work if combined with an overarching framework - hence the need for a single point of use app, which handles the ordering, real-time info, payment etc.
The world won't clamour for these services - as CR says upthread, metros, trams and scheduled buses all have their time and place - but for places and times when usage is low, it's a niche to be filled. And, of course, the framework app they operate within could (and should) be the same one that does all the other transport in the area so users already have familiarity.
I am a great believer in public transport, and am personally willing to overcome the barriers of complexity. I reckon of all car owners I'm in the top 1 percentile of my willingness to use public transport. I haven't got a taxi for over two years.
However, I abhor living life through apps.
I just had this bullshit on the Avanti train. Scan this app for the menu. It was written out last year.
I thought The Truss was a free-speech heroine. For those who've convinced themselves that the New Right will liberate them from the woke offense culture this should give pause for thought - these people are just as keen to punish you for your opinions if they're not to their liking as the woke Left.
One of the most damaging mistakes Labour made was bad-mouthing the UK economy after the election.
A combination of complacency at the state of the economy combined with an assumption that any damage caused be blamed on the previous government.
They are a bunch of managers, not leaders. That is the problem in my opinion. Maybe with the exception of Wes Streeting from what I have seen.
I don’t buy the right-wing crying about the economy though as our borrowing costs would be going through the roof regardless of who had won the election. Let’s not pretend that the Tories or Reform have any interest in actually balancing the budget.
Balancing the budget will require major cuts in spending. Somebody is going to have to do it and Labour are in the chair for the next 4 years.
I agree on the whole but I stand by my point that it is laughable to pretend either the Tories or Reform have any interest in doing so.
I will go further and argue that the electorate as a whole has no interest in doing so either. It will take a talented politician to be able to take the country with them on this.
Not really. If the Government said it was reducing CS headcount by 50%, most of the country would issue a big yawn.
It has to be Reform now, you know you want to. The Tories are done, finished, nixed. They cannot be forgiven for the Boriswave, and they can’t be trusted to do anything actually rightwing, most of them are actually Cameroon Lib Dems anyway. Fuck them and let them die
Reform it is. Let’s have a proper right wing government, no more ersatz shit. A government that will destroy Woke and sort immigration and act like it’s just got out of the gym and it’s had three gins and it’s ready to RUCK, and then have a nice Penang curry
I think Reform (in office) would be shit and they're economically statist.
Not quite my cup of tea.
I suspect that if you asked their four MPs, Reform would have four different notions on what to do with the economy.
They are probably the one party that could make Labour's economic management look coherent and capable in comparison. No mean feat.
They should be seen as a huge threat to both Labour and the Conservatives. Post Trump's win in November the mainstream media have been felating Farage. He was on talking bollocks to Nick Ferrari this week, and under no time was he called out. Ferrari kept banging on about the spat with Musk, as if that was the golden bullet for the Tories.
Something else that benefits Farage is the Tory notion that out Faraging Farage wins them votes. Jenrick is a case in point. Farage looks like a liberal compared to the raging hate and racism promoted by Honest Bob.
I'd feel for the King trying to pick between those two possible coalitions.
He wouldn't have to. That's not how it works.
If that was the result of the election then Starmer remains PM until he either resigns, loses a Confidence vote in the House or is replaced as Labour leader. There is no need for the Kind to intervene proactively.
If he resigns or loses in the House, then convention is to call on the LotO to try to form a government though with this kind of result, it would be better for a proxy on behalf of the King to take soundings on who, in the absence of the outgoing PM, would have the best chance of holding the House's confidence. But if those soundings produce no positive outcome then the call goes to Farage.
I thought the precedent from 2010 was that the leader of the largest party got first dibs at forming a government? And then the monarch would assess it's viability compared with the current one.
Brown bounced Cameron into Downing Street before he'd actually made the proposal to the Queen.
No, practice is that a PM has the right to meet parliament if he or she wants to. If it was 'biggest first gets first dibs' then Brown would have resigned on the Friday. He didn't because he wanted to try to salvage a coalition deal himself (despite the numbers). It was only when that was clearly heading for failure, even though the Con-LD deal wasn't sealed, that he quit. Feb-March 1974 was similar, with Heath trying to hold on even though Labour had slightly more seats. In 1923, Baldwin did hold out until parliament sat, after losing his majority (by a long way), though in that case the Tories were still the largest party.
As it's not possible to assess viability in parallel, the first thing to assess is the viability of the current government, which is for the Commons, or the sitting PM, or his or her party, to do. Only then need the Palace get involved with the *potential* viability of alternative governments.
I think we’re on the verge of a cage fight between the weak chinned pervert in Romania and the squeaky voiced SAS diddy becoming part of the UK political discourse.
One of the most damaging mistakes Labour made was bad-mouthing the UK economy after the election.
A combination of complacency at the state of the economy combined with an assumption that any damage caused be blamed on the previous government.
They are a bunch of managers, not leaders. That is the problem in my opinion. Maybe with the exception of Wes Streeting from what I have seen.
I don’t buy the right-wing crying about the economy though as our borrowing costs would be going through the roof regardless of who had won the election. Let’s not pretend that the Tories or Reform have any interest in actually balancing the budget.
Balancing the budget will require major cuts in spending. Somebody is going to have to do it and Labour are in the chair for the next 4 years.
I agree on the whole but I stand by my point that it is laughable to pretend either the Tories or Reform have any interest in doing so.
I will go further and argue that the electorate as a whole has no interest in doing so either. It will take a talented politician to be able to take the country with them on this.
Not really. If the Government said it was reducing CS headcount by 50%, most of the country would issue a big yawn.
Truss sends lawyer's letter to Starmer about the crashing of the economy under her leadership.
Labour HQ: Yippee!!!! And we were having such a shit couple of weeks!!
True if the current figures were even a patch above what they were after the minibudget fiasco, or people felt better off. They're not, and they don't, so I think Truss has timed her letter very well.
Mandy Rice Davies applies.
N.B. The mini budget was an immediate shock and unique to the UK act of self harm.
You can add in the Reeves budget if you like (it hasn't helped) but the government bond borrowing crisis is affecting other debt ridden nations. The key is the world trade calamity expected after 20th January.
It has to be Reform now, you know you want to. The Tories are done, finished, nixed. They cannot be forgiven for the Boriswave, and they can’t be trusted to do anything actually rightwing, most of them are actually Cameroon Lib Dems anyway. Fuck them and let them die
Reform it is. Let’s have a proper right wing government, no more ersatz shit. A government that will destroy Woke and sort immigration and act like it’s just got out of the gym and it’s had three gins and it’s ready to RUCK, and then have a nice Penang curry
I think Reform (in office) would be shit and they're economically statist.
Not quite my cup of tea.
I suspect that if you asked their four MPs, Reform would have four different notions on what to do with the economy.
They are probably the one party that could make Labour's economic management look coherent and capable in comparison. No mean feat.
If they make up with Musk they can delegate to him cutting government expenditure by a third.
I think we’re on the verge of a cage fight between the weak chinned pervert in Romania and the squeaky voiced SAS diddy becoming part of the UK political discourse.
I think we’re on the verge of a cage fight between the weak chinned pervert in Romania and the squeaky voiced SAS diddy becoming part of the UK political discourse.
Lots of talk on TwiX now about the millionaires and non Doms fleeing the UK. At a time of great impoverishment the Labour government has contrived to frighten away the most important part of our tax base, and told them btw private schools will be slowly abolished via taxes
It’s all adding up. All these allegedly small things are adding up to a looming and desperate collision with reality. Even as we allow in millions of migrants who will be a net drain on the treasury, house thousands of asylum seekers in the savoy at billions a year, and pay Tanzania forty trillion quid to take control of Cornwall
It’s coming. A crash
Brace
As always 'More or Less' is your friend. When you were spouting this awhile ago More or Less debunked it. Who to believe, some nutters on twitter or people who analyse the data properly. It appears the definition of millionaire and sample selection were, how can we put it, bollocks.
Are you seriously disputing that rich people are leaving the UK? Every metric shows they are and in number
COUTTS LONDON PRIME PROPERTY INDEX Q3 2024: PRICES DROP AND BUYERS GET BIGGER DISCOUNTS
Our latest research on luxury London property shows prices falling, average discounts close to 9% and almost 80% of sales coming in below asking price.
Nope I'm not. Just pointing out that last time you did this by quoting a survey you saw somewhere it turned out to be complete bollocks. I know you think you are always right, but you seem to have a very short memory and a very poor source of your data.
If it helps I can give you personal experience instead of surveys - over the pre Christmas drinks party rounds I met (and I noted the number for work reasons) 22 couples who have already or are in the process of moving here from the UK as an absolute direct result of Labour winning the election last year.
All of these people, all 22 couples were people who had set up successful businesses - not inherited money. They are selling or have sold their UK properties, stopped paying staff, stopped buying luxury goods and cars in the UK. Will not be setting up new business or employing people in the UK for the foreseeable future, not paying any more taxes to the UK.
This is one small place - just think how many are going to larger places such as Switzerland, Dubai etc.
I’m sure there will be people who say “good riddance” but remember the new car they bought each year covered an essential salary from the VAT. The shops they shopped in need fewer staff with fewer customers. Their gardeners and housekeepers will find fewer hours to work.
I’ve said it before - I do not rejoice in this, it’s not necessarily good for where I live but it’s worse for the UK which I love.
So ideologically sticking it to the rich will prove to be a stupid act of self harm.
It is a shame they're going. But I also fear there's very little we can do to help people who are so utterly selfish.
It's interesting that some people like the half the idea of Global Britain - easy to come here and work. But the corollary to that is that people find it easier to leave.
Take one bloke in my team. Indian, first generation immigrant. Got wife and baby, no school as yet. Been in the country about 6 years. Why shouldn't he move to Berlin, or wherever?
He looks at what he is paying in taxes and what he gets for it. And is not impressed. Transactional, maybe. But why should he think differently?
I agree. Mrs J is in that situation. She could be earning more in Turkey - or the USA - than here. But we don't move. Why? Partly the reasons she moved to this country in the first place, and partly because the UK is still a good place to live on a moderate income.
Others disagree. But the country needs more money to fix problems it has. Austerity - which I was in favour of - has been tried, and probably went too far. So how else do we get the money? There is no magic money tree.
Isn’t this attitude from you and Mrs J selfish? Mrs J could earn more and contribute more in taxes to the country that nurtured her but instead she has upped sticks to another country for reasons she has decided are better for her rather than society in general?
And frankly if you worked a bit harder you could contribute more in taxes to the UK but instead you rather selfishly have decided to balance your work and life to suit the needs of your family?
I think it’s perfectly fair and correct that you and Mrs J have chosen your residence to suit your priorities over the needs of a country as a whole.
Lots of talk on TwiX now about the millionaires and non Doms fleeing the UK. At a time of great impoverishment the Labour government has contrived to frighten away the most important part of our tax base, and told them btw private schools will be slowly abolished via taxes
It’s all adding up. All these allegedly small things are adding up to a looming and desperate collision with reality. Even as we allow in millions of migrants who will be a net drain on the treasury, house thousands of asylum seekers in the savoy at billions a year, and pay Tanzania forty trillion quid to take control of Cornwall
It’s coming. A crash
Brace
As always 'More or Less' is your friend. When you were spouting this awhile ago More or Less debunked it. Who to believe, some nutters on twitter or people who analyse the data properly. It appears the definition of millionaire and sample selection were, how can we put it, bollocks.
Are you seriously disputing that rich people are leaving the UK? Every metric shows they are and in number
COUTTS LONDON PRIME PROPERTY INDEX Q3 2024: PRICES DROP AND BUYERS GET BIGGER DISCOUNTS
Our latest research on luxury London property shows prices falling, average discounts close to 9% and almost 80% of sales coming in below asking price.
Nope I'm not. Just pointing out that last time you did this by quoting a survey you saw somewhere it turned out to be complete bollocks. I know you think you are always right, but you seem to have a very short memory and a very poor source of your data.
If it helps I can give you personal experience instead of surveys - over the pre Christmas drinks party rounds I met (and I noted the number for work reasons) 22 couples who have already or are in the process of moving here from the UK as an absolute direct result of Labour winning the election last year.
All of these people, all 22 couples were people who had set up successful businesses - not inherited money. They are selling or have sold their UK properties, stopped paying staff, stopped buying luxury goods and cars in the UK. Will not be setting up new business or employing people in the UK for the foreseeable future, not paying any more taxes to the UK.
This is one small place - just think how many are going to larger places such as Switzerland, Dubai etc.
I’m sure there will be people who say “good riddance” but remember the new car they bought each year covered an essential salary from the VAT. The shops they shopped in need fewer staff with fewer customers. Their gardeners and housekeepers will find fewer hours to work.
I’ve said it before - I do not rejoice in this, it’s not necessarily good for where I live but it’s worse for the UK which I love.
So ideologically sticking it to the rich will prove to be a stupid act of self harm.
It is a shame they're going. But I also fear there's very little we can do to help people who are so utterly selfish.
It's interesting that some people like the half the idea of Global Britain - easy to come here and work. But the corollary to that is that people find it easier to leave.
Take one bloke in my team. Indian, first generation immigrant. Got wife and baby, no school as yet. Been in the country about 6 years. Why shouldn't he move to Berlin, or wherever?
He looks at what he is paying in taxes and what he gets for it. And is not impressed. Transactional, maybe. But why should he think differently?
I agree. Mrs J is in that situation. She could be earning more in Turkey - or the USA - than here. But we don't move. Why? Partly the reasons she moved to this country in the first place, and partly because the UK is still a good place to live on a moderate income.
Others disagree. But the country needs more money to fix problems it has. Austerity - which I was in favour of - has been tried, and probably went too far. So how else do we get the money? There is no magic money tree.
Isn’t this attitude from you and Mrs J selfish? Mrs J could earn more and contribute more in taxes to the country that nurtured her but instead she has upped sticks to another country for reasons she has decided are better for her rather than society in general?
And frankly if you worked a bit harder you could contribute more in taxes to the UK but instead you rather selfishly have decided to balance your work and life to suit the needs of your family?
I think it’s perfectly fair and correct that you and Mrs J have chosen your residence to suit your priorities over the needs of a country as a whole.
She had reasons other than money and payment of taxes to come over here: in many ways she would (probably) be earning more over there. And hopefully she has been more than a net benefit to her adopted country.
And yes, you have a point: we are all selfish to a certain degree. I bet, if you dig deep into your soul, you what see selfishness in your good self.
So hopefully you'd agree with my original proposition, that these people are being selfish?
Yes but even then on that poll Farage has zero chance of becoming PM without Tory confidence and supply. So Kemi would be Kingmaker and want a place in his Cabinet assuming she didn’t back Starmer.
Most likely though on that poll it would be a Labour minority government with LD and SNP confidence and supply
Looks like Labour has lost the support of one of the big papers:
Sunday Sport @thesundaysport Just an idea: maybe not pay £9bn to give away an island, not spend £22bn sucking up air and not give £11.6billion to the Third World to change the weather? #GovernmentIsEasy
Yes but even then on that poll Farage has zero chance of becoming PM without Tory confidence and supply. So Kemi would be Kingmaker and want a place in his Cabinet assuming she didn’t back Starmer.
Most likely though on that poll it would be a Labour minority government with LD and SNP confidence and supply
Who would you anticipate would be the 3rd party that would prop up a Reform/Con government? It would still be a long way short of a majority?
Heh, what a mess that would be. I can't see any realistic majority coalition there.
Starmer resigns, Streeting heads up a grand coalition of Lab-Con-LD. Tories down to about 30 seats in 2034 with either LOTO Farage or his successor as PM.
More likely a Lab-LD minority coalition. Cons would be signing their death warrant to join that. But getting much done would be extremely difficult, except electoral reform ironically. Second election within 12-18 months.
The LD's and Reform would have appetite for Electoral Reform, would Labour though ? Unless a strict manifest pledge. There are many in Labour who still oppose it.
Whilst setting aside the hypocrisy of UKIP/Reform asking for a referendum rerun, it is about time FPTP was abandoned and electoral reform embraced. Giving untrammelled power to a PM on 20% of those eligible to vote should be the final straw.
Yes but even then on that poll Farage has zero chance of becoming PM without Tory confidence and supply. So Kemi would be Kingmaker and want a place in his Cabinet assuming she didn’t back Starmer.
Most likely though on that poll it would be a Labour minority government with LD and SNP confidence and supply
SAw what you did there.
Clue: what party doesn't like voting on England-only matters?
Looks like Labour has lost the support of one of the big papers:
Sunday Sport @thesundaysport Just an idea: maybe not pay £9bn to give away an island, not spend £22bn sucking up air and not give £11.6billion to the Third World to change the weather? #GovernmentIsEasy
Yes but even then on that poll Farage has zero chance of becoming PM without Tory confidence and supply. So Kemi would be Kingmaker and want a place in his Cabinet assuming she didn’t back Starmer.
Most likely though on that poll it would be a Labour minority government with LD and SNP confidence and supply
On those results wouldn't she want to resign before she was pushed?
The Accrington Stanley milk advert crops up more than expected on here. A story in the Telegraph today: one of its actors has gone on to considerable success on telly, stage and in writing (but still gets more kudos for the advert) ... the other is currently in jail for murder, life having gone downhill in his teens. Like some play by Willy Russell: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2025/01/09/accrington-stanley-milk-advert-liverpool-fa-cup-1980s/
Lots of talk on TwiX now about the millionaires and non Doms fleeing the UK. At a time of great impoverishment the Labour government has contrived to frighten away the most important part of our tax base, and told them btw private schools will be slowly abolished via taxes
It’s all adding up. All these allegedly small things are adding up to a looming and desperate collision with reality. Even as we allow in millions of migrants who will be a net drain on the treasury, house thousands of asylum seekers in the savoy at billions a year, and pay Tanzania forty trillion quid to take control of Cornwall
It’s coming. A crash
Brace
As always 'More or Less' is your friend. When you were spouting this awhile ago More or Less debunked it. Who to believe, some nutters on twitter or people who analyse the data properly. It appears the definition of millionaire and sample selection were, how can we put it, bollocks.
Are you seriously disputing that rich people are leaving the UK? Every metric shows they are and in number
COUTTS LONDON PRIME PROPERTY INDEX Q3 2024: PRICES DROP AND BUYERS GET BIGGER DISCOUNTS
Our latest research on luxury London property shows prices falling, average discounts close to 9% and almost 80% of sales coming in below asking price.
Nope I'm not. Just pointing out that last time you did this by quoting a survey you saw somewhere it turned out to be complete bollocks. I know you think you are always right, but you seem to have a very short memory and a very poor source of your data.
If it helps I can give you personal experience instead of surveys - over the pre Christmas drinks party rounds I met (and I noted the number for work reasons) 22 couples who have already or are in the process of moving here from the UK as an absolute direct result of Labour winning the election last year.
All of these people, all 22 couples were people who had set up successful businesses - not inherited money. They are selling or have sold their UK properties, stopped paying staff, stopped buying luxury goods and cars in the UK. Will not be setting up new business or employing people in the UK for the foreseeable future, not paying any more taxes to the UK.
This is one small place - just think how many are going to larger places such as Switzerland, Dubai etc.
I’m sure there will be people who say “good riddance” but remember the new car they bought each year covered an essential salary from the VAT. The shops they shopped in need fewer staff with fewer customers. Their gardeners and housekeepers will find fewer hours to work.
I’ve said it before - I do not rejoice in this, it’s not necessarily good for where I live but it’s worse for the UK which I love.
So ideologically sticking it to the rich will prove to be a stupid act of self harm.
It is a shame they're going. But I also fear there's very little we can do to help people who are so utterly selfish.
Or perhaps you/we are?
I'd certainly think so if someone demanded all my money whilst I took all the risk and did all the work.
Nah. I've not demanded all your money. Far from. But from what I see, you live a good life. Others, who work harder than you, and take many more risks, are much less rewarded.
I want to reward those who work hard, and also those who take risks (e.g. in starting up businesses). But that has to be tempered by the fact you also live in society. If you take risks and fail - as can happen if it is a genuine risk - then you should not be left destitute.
And an awful lot of people earn money with very little risk - in both the private and public sector.
If, heaven forfend, you are taken ill, then you would want the doctors and nurses who look after you not to be overworked and to have access to all the equipment you need? Why should the binmen who are out collecting our bins this morning not get paid well for work I wouldn't want to do? How about a careworker I know who just told me he got threatened by an elderly patient, and the police had to be called?
We live in a society, and that society needs to work as a whole. We are not islands.
Yeah, but this is motherhood and apple pie stuff and you could use it to defend any level of tax. In fact, you just have. Because you're using it as an argument to pay tax - period - and not acknowledging there's a limit. What it comes down to is resentment that some people earn more than you, and you want some of it.
When you tax people at 60%+ for stressful jobs, that involve a lot of stress, professional and personal risk (no-one gets paid a good salary for a simple job just about anyone can do) then at some point they will say, fuck it.
You will have no recourse to criticise them.
No, is it resentment. I'm perfectly happy with people earning more than we do as a family. Incredibly relaxed. I've said so many times in the past. I want work rewarded - at the low as well as the top end. And there's big problems with both of these at the moment.
But I also understand that we live in a society, and are part of that society. Without money, that society falls apart - including the bits you rely on. So it becomes a question of where to balance that. And sadly, that balance is currently set so the country is in debt.
If you want stress, I might suggest you try not having enough money to get food on the table for your family, or not enough to pay rent to keep the roof over your head. To have two kids, one of whom has Down's Syndrome. to have a spouse with cancer, and finding it hard to get the bus fare to the hospital (only to find the appointment has been cancelled...)
Looks like Labour has lost the support of one of the big papers:
Sunday Sport @thesundaysport Just an idea: maybe not pay £9bn to give away an island, not spend £22bn sucking up air and not give £11.6billion to the Third World to change the weather? #GovernmentIsEasy
Add Max's £5 Bn onto that and we're up to £50 Bn. Now obviously it's a total figure and not annual spending but we're starting to see where the 10 yr gilt yield could drop off a few BPs...
Easy spending cut for Labour is £9bn to Mauritius.
But it's virtue spending as a luxury belief for them to show how wonderful they are. So I imagine it'll be sacred.
There have been more consultations/murmurings about Leeds getting a tram system. I expect this to be cancelled. Yet again (not party political, it's happened under them all, repeatedly).
To be fair, trams are just expensive and inflexible buses, that disrupt the city for many years while the streets are dug up to put the rails in. A metro system is the way to go, particularly for the centre - it can run above ground elsewhere.
Getting it built would require changes to processes though. The majority of the cost is in regulation.
Metros are even more expensive.
Trams can run on lower energy, due to reduced coefficient of friction, and be electrified and pull longer/heavier loads; they are also more reliable than buses.
Metros are only more expensive in terms of the costs to build and run. But they move a lot more people (and cause less disruption) so in terms of passenger usage they're better value.
And there's quite a lot in that on terms of being more expensive to build and run. It can be billions on the first and tens of millions on the second. Economics depends on the density of the population to drive revenue and the difficultly of construction to serve it, and hence why you run a business case.
In medium sized cities trams make more sense. Large cities metros. Small places, buses.
Not to go the full Liam Neeson, but I do this for a living.
Indeed. And Leeds is a large enough city.
You could also add smart buses to even smaller places / more rural / less dense / low-demand times. The broad concept of public transport of 'we run where we say, when we say' is out of the stagecoach era. Technology allows a much more user-focused approach now, if providers and regulators can get together to develop and introduce the software.
You don't like trams, and would prefer a metro - I get that - but that does not a business case make. Public transport works well where there is a latent demand for travel along the route - it isn't done in a vacuum - and if you can get below 10 minute gaps in service and operate 18 hours a day (big ifs, of course) you don't need a timetable.
Also, people tend not to like buses for all of reliability, service quality, and privacy/ safety/ social reasons. Uber is far closer to the user-focuses transport you crave these days, but has scattered coverage outside London.
Correct. And one bus every 2-3 hours during the daytime is barely a service at all.
It should be perfectly possible to essentially order a bus in the same way as an Uber to take you from A to B, but potentially via C, D and E, as the bus picks up and drops off passengers via a smartphone app, with the driver given a real-time amended route as people order the service. You could run these both in rural areas and at low-demand times everywhere, linked to a smartcard for both the user's and the operator's security.
Obviously it would need a subsidy but then so do pretty much all services in those places and at that time.
Services such as you describe exist. But they don't, so far, do very well. They have neither the simplicity or an uber nor the, er, simplicity of a bus (which we could also call predictability, or ease of understanding). Users of public transport LOVE simplicity above anything else. Require them to think, and they will shift to the simpler alternative. One of the reasons fixed track does so well is simplicity. Users know where it's going - it follows the rails - they don't worry about where to get off. Introduce any sort of uncertainty into a bus journey at your peril.
I'm not going as far as saying you're wrong - as I say, such services exist, though tend to run at large losses - but they are not what the world is clamouring for, yet. It will take a bit of a shift in mindset, which is hard to do.
I think they're under-developed. They would only really work if combined with an overarching framework - hence the need for a single point of use app, which handles the ordering, real-time info, payment etc.
The world won't clamour for these services - as CR says upthread, metros, trams and scheduled buses all have their time and place - but for places and times when usage is low, it's a niche to be filled. And, of course, the framework app they operate within could (and should) be the same one that does all the other transport in the area so users already have familiarity.
I am a great believer in public transport, and am personally willing to overcome the barriers of complexity. I reckon of all car owners I'm in the top 1 percentile of my willingness to use public transport. I haven't got a taxi for over two years.
However, I abhor living life through apps.
I just had this bullshit on the Avanti train. Scan this app for the menu. It was written out last year.
Easy spending cut for Labour is £9bn to Mauritius.
But it's virtue spending as a luxury belief for them to show how wonderful they are. So I imagine it'll be sacred.
There have been more consultations/murmurings about Leeds getting a tram system. I expect this to be cancelled. Yet again (not party political, it's happened under them all, repeatedly).
To be fair, trams are just expensive and inflexible buses, that disrupt the city for many years while the streets are dug up to put the rails in. A metro system is the way to go, particularly for the centre - it can run above ground elsewhere.
Getting it built would require changes to processes though. The majority of the cost is in regulation.
Metros are even more expensive.
Trams can run on lower energy, due to reduced coefficient of friction, and be electrified and pull longer/heavier loads; they are also more reliable than buses.
Metros are only more expensive in terms of the costs to build and run. But they move a lot more people (and cause less disruption) so in terms of passenger usage they're better value.
And there's quite a lot in that on terms of being more expensive to build and run. It can be billions on the first and tens of millions on the second. Economics depends on the density of the population to drive revenue and the difficultly of construction to serve it, and hence why you run a business case.
In medium sized cities trams make more sense. Large cities metros. Small places, buses.
Not to go the full Liam Neeson, but I do this for a living.
Indeed. And Leeds is a large enough city.
You could also add smart buses to even smaller places / more rural / less dense / low-demand times. The broad concept of public transport of 'we run where we say, when we say' is out of the stagecoach era. Technology allows a much more user-focused approach now, if providers and regulators can get together to develop and introduce the software.
You don't like trams, and would prefer a metro - I get that - but that does not a business case make. Public transport works well where there is a latent demand for travel along the route - it isn't done in a vacuum - and if you can get below 10 minute gaps in service and operate 18 hours a day (big ifs, of course) you don't need a timetable.
Also, people tend not to like buses for all of reliability, service quality, and privacy/ safety/ social reasons. Uber is far closer to the user-focuses transport you crave these days, but has scattered coverage outside London.
Correct. And one bus every 2-3 hours during the daytime is barely a service at all.
It should be perfectly possible to essentially order a bus in the same way as an Uber to take you from A to B, but potentially via C, D and E, as the bus picks up and drops off passengers via a smartphone app, with the driver given a real-time amended route as people order the service. You could run these both in rural areas and at low-demand times everywhere, linked to a smartcard for both the user's and the operator's security.
Obviously it would need a subsidy but then so do pretty much all services in those places and at that time.
Services such as you describe exist. But they don't, so far, do very well. They have neither the simplicity or an uber nor the, er, simplicity of a bus (which we could also call predictability, or ease of understanding). Users of public transport LOVE simplicity above anything else. Require them to think, and they will shift to the simpler alternative. One of the reasons fixed track does so well is simplicity. Users know where it's going - it follows the rails - they don't worry about where to get off. Introduce any sort of uncertainty into a bus journey at your peril.
I'm not going as far as saying you're wrong - as I say, such services exist, though tend to run at large losses - but they are not what the world is clamouring for, yet. It will take a bit of a shift in mindset, which is hard to do.
I think they're under-developed. They would only really work if combined with an overarching framework - hence the need for a single point of use app, which handles the ordering, real-time info, payment etc.
The world won't clamour for these services - as CR says upthread, metros, trams and scheduled buses all have their time and place - but for places and times when usage is low, it's a niche to be filled. And, of course, the framework app they operate within could (and should) be the same one that does all the other transport in the area so users already have familiarity.
I am a great believer in public transport, and am personally willing to overcome the barriers of complexity. I reckon of all car owners I'm in the top 1 percentile of my willingness to use public transport. I haven't got a taxi for over two years.
However, I abhor living life through apps.
I just had this bullshit on the Avanti train. Scan this app for the menu. It was written out last year.
I asked her to just tell me.
Organisations demanding you download their shitty app and share your data so that you can buy their product has got to be one of the most irritating aspects of the digital age. It would be a good thing to legislate on. When I go into a carpark I do not want to waste 5 mins of my life trying to download a shitty app I may not need again. Allow me to pay via contactless FFS!!!
The Accrington Stanley milk advert crops up more than expected on here. A story in the Telegraph today: one of its actors has gone on to considerable success on telly, stage and in writing (but still gets more kudos for the advert) ... the other is currently in jail for murder, life having gone downhill in his teens. Like some play by Willy Russell: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2025/01/09/accrington-stanley-milk-advert-liverpool-fa-cup-1980s/
Which one went on to great things? The enthusiastic or unenthusiastic milk drinker?
Comments
Lab/Lib/SNP/Green/Plaid or Reform/Con/Lib
Neither seem remotely doable.
Major volatility. The Great Vibeshift is hitting the UK as it is hitting every western nation, the entire West is swinging hard right
You can feel it in the air. Sudden optimism, the long dismal night of liberal wankery, the Narnian winter of Wokeness, is slowly coming to an end
As I said before, we're heading for a pretty nasty sovereign debt crisis and the government will have to pull back on spending commitments to keep bond investors happy. I'd suggest junking the Chagos deal, the CCS money and cutting by 2/3rds the extra money for the NHS just to start and then going in for departmental headcount cuts of 20-30% for non customer facing roles and banning consultancy and agency workers across the state with pay bracket increases for highly technical or skilled roles.
Reeves will be irreparably holed below the water line with Starmer, Lammy isn't a credible grand coalition PM. Surely Starmer can't stay on with such a defeat lol.
Anyone else credible on the right of Labour to be PM for the grand coalition option ?
Badenoch might chuck her lot in as junior partner to Reform, on these numbers even though it's not a majority the Sinners basically ensure the QS won't be defeated.
LAB: 238 (-173)
RFM: 170 (+165)
CON: 89 (-32)
LDM: 70 (-2)
SNP: 42 (+33)
GRN: 7 (+3)
PLC: 4 (=)
Others: 11 (+6) [+ Speaker (1) and NI (18)]
Not quite my cup of tea.
The world won't clamour for these services - as CR says upthread, metros, trams and scheduled buses all have their time and place - but for places and times when usage is low, it's a niche to be filled. And, of course, the framework app they operate within could (and should) be the same one that does all the other transport in the area so users already have familiarity.
The trend is clear - LabCon are freewheeling downwards. Unless something changes both in terms of personnel and performance it’s hard to see when that might change.
Reform need to do many many things. One being to learn how parliament works. They need to know how to be effective as an opposition and not just agitate.
That's the real extinction level event for the Conservatives. If Reform become the main opposition even when Labour are >30%.
The "he's got to come through me first" nonsense. He sounds like some post pubescent teen defending his bird on a night out down the local Spoons.
https://x.com/trussliz/status/1877344139404026104
I expect whoever replaces him will run rings round Labour tbh.
Would serve their independence purposes surely to have a very right wing, reactionary UK government?
If that was the result of the election then Starmer remains PM until he either resigns, loses a Confidence vote in the House or is replaced as Labour leader. There is no need for the Kind to intervene proactively.
If he resigns or loses in the House, then convention is to call on the LotO to try to form a government though with this kind of result, it would be better for a proxy on behalf of the King to take soundings on who, in the absence of the outgoing PM, would have the best chance of holding the House's confidence. But if those soundings produce no positive outcome then the call goes to Farage.
Thinking of the Liz Truss suing Keir Starmer thing, although at the moment it's just a Cease and Desist - do we actually have any examples of active politicians going through with a Defamation Action to verdict - even against a PM?
I'm sure people here will know some.
The closest major recent one I have in my mind is Anna Turley XMP who sued Len McClusterfuck, which cost Unite the Union north of £1m rather than a free apology they had been offered.
My MP Lee Anderson had a couple, but they petered out.
Jack Hammer
Len Steel
Tom Banner
Bill Brass
Vic Loader
Dave Firm
Pete Trencher
However, I abhor living life through apps.
So personally, I reckon this one wouldn't be for me.
But that's just a personal view.
But Labour would also have to be mindful that FPTP had delivered them one majority in six elections at that point, but did have the potential to give Reform a majority, possibly a stonking one if the cards fell right for them in a very diverse field. I think the various pressures would be enough to tip Labour into backing the change.
Brown bounced Cameron into Downing Street before he'd actually made the proposal to the Queen.
LeftieStats on (gulp) the next Senedd Election in Wales: a tie between RefCon and LabPCLib
https://nitter.poast.org/LeftieStats/status/1877041326178410629#m - note, fieldwork in Nov
https://x.com/trussliz/status/1877334108453413020
Labour, the @bankofengland and the media establishment smeared my budget and forced a reversal.
Now, they've plunged the country into economic crisis.
But the Liberal-SDP alliance led polls through late 1981-82, peaking at 50%, so did stand a very real chance of winning outright. Indeed, the tipping point was probably not the Falklands, which propelled the Tories back into the lead, but Healey edging out Benn for Labour's deputy leadership. Had that election gone the other way, it would likely have produced a further tide of defections which may well have cemented the SDP's primacy on the left. But such are the footprints in the shores of history.
Obviously, if Reform did win then they'd flounder hopelessly, screw everything up and blame someone else; that's what radical parties do. but they could win.
They are probably the one party that could make Labour's economic management look coherent and capable in comparison. No mean feat.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2025/jan/09/uk-politics-labour-conservatives-david-lammy-trump-greenland-latest-updates#top-of-blog
At the same ceremony, she should be given the Keys to the City of Lyme Regis, and made a Dame.
Truss is very upset. The posts/comments are deliberately designed to upset Truss and are done in the full knowledge of upsetting Truss. Truth is not a relevant criteria.
'Incidentally, since there has been much debate around so-called Slapps (strategic lawsuits against public participation), much of the ostensible concern about which has been raised by Conservative politicians in recent years (as well as outlets such as the Guardian), it is perhaps worth pointing out that Truss’s letter is a textbook example of a Slapp.'
I asked her to just tell me.
Something else that benefits Farage is the Tory notion that out Faraging Farage wins them votes. Jenrick is a case in point. Farage looks like a liberal compared to the raging hate and racism promoted by Honest Bob.
As it's not possible to assess viability in parallel, the first thing to assess is the viability of the current government, which is for the Commons, or the sitting PM, or his or her party, to do. Only then need the Palace get involved with the *potential* viability of alternative governments.
https://x.com/antmiddleton/status/1877049210077356395?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
That or they are just a normal Audi driver.
*I think we can add Lab to the list too, at least for 2024 results.
Long standing ones like Opinium, Survation, Delta (who don't appear to have changed anything following GE), giving Labour healthy leads.
'Newer' kids on the block like, FON, MIC, Techne etc giving Con or Reform lead or very small Lab lead.
Others like Yougov, Ipsos, R&W etc giving it all a wide berth while they try and work out what went wrong.
Or you can look at Local Election results - big Labour loses, large Con gain, small Reform gains, LD & Green not doing a lot.
Take your pick.
N.B. The mini budget was an immediate shock and unique to the UK act of self harm.
You can add in the Reeves budget if you like (it hasn't helped) but the government bond borrowing crisis is affecting other debt ridden nations. The key is the world trade calamity expected after 20th January.
"Why the hell hasn't the British military taken charge of the UK, yet?"
And yes, you have a point: we are all selfish to a certain degree. I bet, if you dig deep into your soul, you what see selfishness in your good self.
So hopefully you'd agree with my original proposition, that these people are being selfish?
Most likely though on that poll it would be a Labour minority government with LD and SNP confidence and supply
Sunday Sport
@thesundaysport
Just an idea: maybe not pay £9bn to give away an island, not spend £22bn sucking up air and not give £11.6billion to the Third World to change the weather?
#GovernmentIsEasy
https://x.com/thesundaysport/status/1877342007623819766
Clue: what party doesn't like voting on England-only matters?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2025/01/09/accrington-stanley-milk-advert-liverpool-fa-cup-1980s/
But I also understand that we live in a society, and are part of that society. Without money, that society falls apart - including the bits you rely on. So it becomes a question of where to balance that. And sadly, that balance is currently set so the country is in debt.
If you want stress, I might suggest you try not having enough money to get food on the table for your family, or not enough to pay rent to keep the roof over your head. To have two kids, one of whom has Down's Syndrome. to have a spouse with cancer, and finding it hard to get the bus fare to the hospital (only to find the appointment has been cancelled...)