Foreign aid helps some of the poorest people in the world. People far worse off than anyone in the UK. People who could easily be us if not for the random fate of birth circumstances. That fact that it's good politics (which sadly it is) to choose this as the area to cut to boost military spending doesn't reflect well on us.
It wouldn't be hard for any party to run those bullet points, even the Greens with only minimal editing:
We need to get value for money – so much of your money is being wasted on privatised utilities and services. We need significant reforms of health, education, social services and tax to make them work for you again We need to make work pay your bills, and that means cutting the cost of living We need to restore pride in our communities, our country and in ourselves We need to stop our town and cities falling into disrepair by fixing the pavements and roads and reopening the shops Elect a Green government and we’ll cut the waste and the tax fraud which We All Know is there. Make Britain a land fit for Our Children’s Futures
It's just Motherhood and Apple pie.
Perhaps. But neither the Tories nor Labour can run 'time for a change' campaigns, and Reform can.
The Greens may well pick up votes at Labour's expense, but they have probably even less economic credibility than Reform, and lack the atavistic appeal. As the polling suggests. They can use the same tactic, but they're not anywhere near vying for the lead in the polls.
In any event, I think Farage's explicit emulation of, and romance with the US right will kill his chances
An SNP version:
We need to get value for money – so much of your money is being wasted by Westminster We need significant reforms of health, education, social services and tax to make them work for you again We need to make work pay your bills, and that means cutting the cost of living We need to restore pride in our communities, in Scotland and in ourselves We need to stop our town and cities falling into disrepair by fixing the pavements and roads and reopening the shops Elect an SNP government and we’ll cut the waste and the fraud which We All Know is there. Make Scotland a land fit for Our Children’s Futures
You missed out ‘We don’t need that **** Farage as pm’.
Mind you Yoon favourite Wings Over Scotland now thinks Reform would allow a second Indy referendum. I think he’s high on his own supply.
Farage is cynical as F***. If it got him a few extra votes he would happily offer people a referendum
Point taken, but not in Scotland (at least not actually allowing one). Reform is Unionist if nothing else. And given current polling, even allowing a referendum is a risk too far. See how many of our PBUnionists didn't want to allow Scotland the freedom to choose they so loudly espouse in other things.
Mr F's been on manoeuvres to set up a Slab-Reform coalition in Holyrood - and Mr Sarwar has been responding to the courtship so far as I can see.
Starmer described Reform as 'dangerous right wing politics' in Scotland on Sunday, on most issues except independence Labour are closer to the SNP than Reform
On topic... what the Fukkers really need are tory defections. To lend some political heft and sustain the impression of (non-majusucle M) momentum.
I doubt Jenners will turn his cloak as he has a realistic expectation of ruling over the smouldering tory rubble left by The Kemster's rapid unscheduled disassembly of the party.
Surely these two collosi deserting the sinking ship will add to the momentum.
On topic, whilst I agree that RP's outline will possibly improve the Reform prospects, the elephant in the room will remain the Trump supporting Putinist agenda.
No one seriously thinks that the USA and the world in general will be in a better place in 4 years time as a result of Trump's utter lunacy both at home and abroad. Indeed the US is going to look utterly devestated because of Trump's economic and social policies. So unless they can generate a complete decoupling between Reform and Trump in people's minds then Farage and his party are going to be tarred with that same brush.
That will swamp any claimed policies they might come up with.
Ambrose Evens Pritchard is predicting a very deep Trump recession in the USA (Telegraph)
If that happens it will redound on the GOP but also Trumpy parties elsewhere. Probably
Two points however
1. AEPritchard is often very prescient but sometimes gets things spectacularly wrong
Substitute 'almost always' for 'sometimes'. Compared to your Oracle of Delphi shtick, he's more like a negative super forecaster.
That’s not really true
He was - AFAICS - the first commentator to really note the huge impact of America’s (then) coming energy independence. And how it would change the world (you could argue that it has led to Trump; America no longer needs the world)
Also - and this is a true story - I used to share an editor with AEP back when I did a few knapping stories for the Tory graph. Editor now at the Times
This editor used to say “I have just two genius writers who sometimes say stupid shit but occasionally say stuff that’s sharper than anyone else - one of them is AEP”
On topic... what the Fukkers really need are tory defections. To lend some political heft and sustain the impression of (non-majusucle M) momentum.
I doubt Jenners will turn his cloak as he has a realistic expectation of ruling over the smouldering tory rubble left by The Kemster's rapid unscheduled disassembly of the party.
Surely these two collosi deserting the sinking ship will add to the momentum.
For those critical of the reduction in overseas aid, what would your preferred alternative be?
Abolish the triple lock and make pensioners pay NI on employment income.
Abolishing the triple lock will save precisely no money at all, until such time as it would mandate a higher rise in pensions than whatever replaces it, presumably a single or double lock of some sort. Of course, if they'd thought of this before announcing April's rise...
However, the Conservative government twice ignored the triple lock anyway, so abolition is unlikely to lead to rioting in the streets but on recent evidence, nor a land flowing with milk and honey.
NI is tricky while it retains its status as qualification for the state pension. You could break that link but where does that leave HMG vis-a-vis Waspi women and the like?
Also, the moment one even mentions breaking the NI-pension link, every Tory association went wooh because almost every pensioner is convinced it's an attempt to means-test the state pension despite all pensioners having paid NI (or given the equivalent credits) all their working lives on the basis of entitlement. Of course when the Tories were in charge Labour pensioners didn't count, but now ...
We need more NI iink to state pensions (scrapping NI credits for starters) not less
Thanks for thread @RochdalePioneers - just on 2005 and "are you thinking what we're thinking?", the Tories came first in England in that election:
2001 (votes/seats)
Lab: 9.06 million (323) Con: 7.71 million (165) LD: 4.25 million (40)
2005:
Lab: 8.05 million (286) Con: 8.12 million (194) LD: 5.20 million (47)
I'm a fan of first past the post, but Labour managing a comfortable majority on that share of the vote was far more problematic than what happened last year. 2005 really ought to have produced a Lab-LD coalition.
For me, 1987 was the best/worst example of FPTP.
SDP/Lib Alliance in England 6.25 million votes, 10 MPs Labour in Scotland 1.25 million votes, 50 MPs
On topic... what the Fukkers really need are tory defections. To lend some political heft and sustain the impression of (non-majusucle M) momentum.
I doubt Jenners will turn his cloak as he has a realistic expectation of ruling over the smouldering tory rubble left by The Kemster's rapid unscheduled disassembly of the party.
Surely these two collosi deserting the sinking ship will add to the momentum.
On topic... what the Fukkers really need are tory defections. To lend some political heft and sustain the impression of (non-majusucle M) momentum.
I doubt Jenners will turn his cloak as he has a realistic expectation of ruling over the smouldering tory rubble left by The Kemster's rapid unscheduled disassembly of the party.
Surely these two collosi deserting the sinking ship will add to the momentum.
Increased defence spending – what will it be spent on? New ships and planes will not be delivered for years, so will they cost anything this year?
To spend the money immediately, a pay rise for all soldiers, sailors and airmen (including lady airmen) would meet the target but not do much to deter Uncle Vlad. It might help end the recruitment and retention crisis, of course.
Or as the new target is a percentage of GDP, the government could attack the problem from the other end by causing a recession.
Or it could follow the Tories' example and just fiddle the figures.
Yes, if it is going to do anything it should be hiring and training more soldiers, and buying things which can be used within a < 5 year time frame. The danger is we just hand it all over to BAE to build things which will be ready in 40 years time.
Actually, BAE makes quite a lot of stuff that can be used quite quickly. Along with the other more problematic kit.
Things that can be done fairly rapidly -
1) purchase ammunition. Stocks of older stuff have been run down - time to actually buy the new. 2) bring forward purchases of existing, produced stuff. Artillery comes to mind. SPGs aren’t especially expensive. 3) bring forward some programs - stuff like smaller missiles. 4) Duct tape programs. Sticking existing stuff together in new ways. See ground launching air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles. There are some lash ups in Ukraine, including converted APCs carrying a whole menu of weapons to be remote requested and fired at the behest of frontline troops
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Don’t we usually have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease? Infectious diseases do not respect international borders.
In many instances, yes, but not always - such as some tropical diseases.
That may come under the aegis of the WHO or other NGOs but I don't think the UK government should be more widely cross-subsidising the healthcare of other countries.
The UK is the leader in vaccination programmes through Malaria Action, GAVI, etc. It is the single most impactful intervention in human health anywhere in the world.
Many of these countries simply can’t afford these programmes - they need food and water for their citizens first.
I’m pretty right wing. But this is both a good use of money and the right thing to do
I'm not down with the White Saviour stuff in Africa, I'm afraid, and doubt those countries are still scratching around for just food and water; it's not the 1980s anymore.
But even if we accept that, and I don't because I think our donations displace others, vaccination programmes are a small proportion of aid spending in any event; ours on GAVI is about £400m per year.
It's not where most of the money is going.
The problem with aid spending is it lets those national governments off the hook and nothing ever changes for them. Withdrawing aid will help people help themselves by voting in governments that will help the people rather than line their own pockets.
Yes, I don't buy the argument that it's UK aid spending that's solely keeping tens of millions of people alive.
I think it's letting others off the hook and giving the better off living here a nice feelgood feeling, a bit like their £10 a month direct debit to Christian Aid writ-large.
So even individual acts of charity are deemed morally repugnant now? This is through the looking glass stuff.
No, I haven't seen that - please don't put words in my mouth.
Some polls have Reform winning most seats already and Farage becoming PM if he can get Tory support. Much like Meloni became PM in Italy with Forza Italia support.
Certainly a 'common sense' agenda on less woke, less immigration, less net zero and more practical solutions like Trump could pay them dividends as it did for him and the GOP when he won the presidency in the US last year and the GOP took Congress
What if Starmer's government has already achieved "less woke, less immigration, and less net zero" by 2028/9 ?
On topic, I won't take Reform's electoral prospects seriously until I see evidence that they've learnt how to operate as a proper political party and are serious about winning actual elections.
I know a fair number of people who say they're committed Reform Party members but their interactions with it make it seem more like the National Trust than a political party. They pay some money and buy some merch but they've never met a local party organiser, been invited to a meeting or had much communication from the central party at all. Reform massively underperformed it's vote share at the last election and I see no evidence to think that's going to wildly change.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Don’t we usually have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease? Infectious diseases do not respect international borders.
In many instances, yes, but not always - such as some tropical diseases.
That may come under the aegis of the WHO or other NGOs but I don't think the UK government should be more widely cross-subsidising the healthcare of other countries.
The UK is the leader in vaccination programmes through Malaria Action, GAVI, etc. It is the single most impactful intervention in human health anywhere in the world.
Many of these countries simply can’t afford these programmes - they need food and water for their citizens first.
I’m pretty right wing. But this is both a good use of money and the right thing to do
The attempt to say a halving of overseas aid (which is what this is) won't have casualties is not credible.
People talk about the need for tough fiscal choices, but cutting the aid budget is the very opposite of that. Indeed, in between the wealthy saying we must cut welfare, and the less well off saying the rich must pay, it seems our ability to make actual sacrifices that affect us personally is pretty limited. Maybe Putin is right about the decadent West. We certainly won't defend ourselves with this kind of pathetic attitude.
Axe the NHS budget to fund bombs for Ukraine is never going to be viable politically, slashing overseas aid to increase defence is
On topic, whilst I agree that RP's outline will possibly improve the Reform prospects, the elephant in the room will remain the Trump supporting Putinist agenda.
No one seriously thinks that the USA and the world in general will be in a better place in 4 years time as a result of Trump's utter lunacy both at home and abroad. Indeed the US is going to look utterly devestated because of Trump's economic and social policies. So unless they can generate a complete decoupling between Reform and Trump in people's minds then Farage and his party are going to be tarred with that same brush.
That will swamp any claimed policies they might come up with.
Ambrose Evens Pritchard is predicting a very deep Trump recession in the USA (Telegraph)
If that happens it will redound on the GOP but also Trumpy parties elsewhere. Probably
Two points however
1. AEPritchard is often very prescient but sometimes gets things spectacularly wrong
Substitute 'almost always' for 'sometimes'. Compared to your Oracle of Delphi shtick, he's more like a negative super forecaster.
That’s not really true
He was - AFAICS - the first commentator to really note the huge impact of America’s (then) coming energy independence. And how it would change the world (you could argue that it has led to Trump; America no longer needs the world)
Also - and this is a true story - I used to share an editor with AEP back when I did a few knapping stories for the Tory graph. Editor now at the Times
This editor used to say “I have just two genius writers who sometimes say stupid shit but occasionally say stuff that’s sharper than anyone else - one of them is AEP”
Increased defence spending is right, cutting the ODA budget is a mistake!
Rather than cut the bloated welfare bill, or the number of civil servants, or GBEnergy, Starmer took the “easy option” stripping money from the poorest in the world and undermining our global influence.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Don’t we usually have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease? Infectious diseases do not respect international borders.
In many instances, yes, but not always - such as some tropical diseases.
That may come under the aegis of the WHO or other NGOs but I don't think the UK government should be more widely cross-subsidising the healthcare of other countries.
The UK is the leader in vaccination programmes through Malaria Action, GAVI, etc. It is the single most impactful intervention in human health anywhere in the world.
Many of these countries simply can’t afford these programmes - they need food and water for their citizens first.
I’m pretty right wing. But this is both a good use of money and the right thing to do
I'm not down with the White Saviour stuff in Africa, I'm afraid, and doubt those countries are still scratching around for just food and water; it's not the 1980s anymore.
But even if we accept that, and I don't because I think our donations displace others, vaccination programmes are a small proportion of aid spending in any event; ours on GAVI is about £400m per year.
It's not where most of the money is going.
I was not a fan of the 0.7% pledge because they should be focused on funding worthwhile projects not hitting an arbitrary target
And there is definitely money wasted - like the £1bn+ we used to give to the EU to hand out.
But the biggest single impact the uk had on the growth of terrorism in east Africa was on funding secondary school education for women.
Turns out that educated women was a man who has a stable job not someone who rides around in a batter jalopy shooting people. Turns out that young men will rather their lifestyle and politics to appeal to attractive and educated young men. Who’d have thought?
Add together GAVI, WHO, UNAIDS, WPC, Malaria funding, etc etc. and you get to a sizeable sum. But in the main well spent.
We need to reduce the number of asylum seekers and immigrants. Correctly deployed, overseas aid reduces the “push” factor and should be in tandem to action to reduce the “pull”. Perhaps we should rebrand it as the Immigration Department and give it the border patrol, DfID, asylum processing etc. joined up government and all that
That's a fair and reasoned position and, in theory, it makes sense.
However, I'm not convinced on the evidence that there's a direct link between our aid and a reduction in terrorism in East Africa, I'm afraid. And there are plenty of countries where women are educated, like China or Russia, who still seem to develop security threats to this country.
I'm far more convinced by the work of the security services, both at home and overseas.
Increased defence spending – what will it be spent on? New ships and planes will not be delivered for years, so will they cost anything this year?
To spend the money immediately, a pay rise for all soldiers, sailors and airmen (including lady airmen) would meet the target but not do much to deter Uncle Vlad. It might help end the recruitment and retention crisis, of course.
Or as the new target is a percentage of GDP, the government could attack the problem from the other end by causing a recession.
Or it could follow the Tories' example and just fiddle the figures.
Yes, if it is going to do anything it should be hiring and training more soldiers, and buying things which can be used within a < 5 year time frame. The danger is we just hand it all over to BAE to build things which will be ready in 40 years time.
Actually, BAE makes quite a lot of stuff that can be used quite quickly. Along with the other more problematic kit.
Things that can be done fairly rapidly -
1) purchase ammunition. Stocks of older stuff have been run down - time to actually buy the new. 2) bring forward purchases of existing, produced stuff. Artillery comes to mind. SPGs aren’t especially expensive. 3) bring forward some programs - stuff like smaller missiles. 4) Duct tape programs. Sticking existing stuff together in new ways. See ground launching air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles. There are some lash ups in Ukraine, including converted APCs carrying a whole menu of weapons to be remote requested and fired at the behest of frontline troops
Add to the immediate stuff - buy a shitload of Hydra rockets and the BAE seeker which turns them into a budget guided missile - and at the other end of the spectrum put in a decent multi year order for the Meteor missile. Mortar rounds: unglamorous, but there's been a dearth of them in Ukraine.
For the longer term, we should be looking at collaboration with Europe for key defence technologies. If the US does end up completely disengaged, we need to be able to replicate some of the stuff they can do and we currently cannot. That's a long term project, which is all the more reason it needs to start now.
Increased defence spending – what will it be spent on? New ships and planes will not be delivered for years, so will they cost anything this year?
I don't think that's much of a concern for anyone involved at the moment. The point of the announcement was to fluff Trump ahead of SKS's visit.
More Typhoon looks like a low effort choice, if only to keep Warton on life support until Tempest makes it past the speculative rendering stage. There will be no new ships any time soon unless the government can bear to get them built South Korea or Vietnam which they can't.
They should pour the cash in to wage increases, improved conditions and better housing for non-commissioned ranks but I would bet my lavish RN pension that they won't.
Of course, we all support the best conditions possible for servicemen (not least of which because it attracts the best people and aids retention) but part of that too is expanding numbers and manpower so they're not so stretched on deployment/roulement and there are sustainable career paths and choices.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
"Batshit crazy" is the politest description I've found for that.
It's worse than merely crazy. This is memeing about ethnic cleansing. It aims to normalise things that should be unacceptable to any decent person.
Yes, repulsive. It's essentially mocking the aspirations of the Palestinians for the basic human rights deemed essential for 'proper' people like Americans and Israelis.
On topic... what the Fukkers really need are tory defections. To lend some political heft and sustain the impression of (non-majusucle M) momentum.
I doubt Jenners will turn his cloak as he has a realistic expectation of ruling over the smouldering tory rubble left by The Kemster's rapid unscheduled disassembly of the party.
Surely these two collosi deserting the sinking ship will add to the momentum.
I've got the misfortune of being in Basingstoke today (don't ask) and every bloke looks like the top guy (Rag and Bone Man style), whilst clearly being in their 20s.
Bet they have shit tattoos over 30% of their bodies as well.
I suspect the electorate will watch the horror show that is unfolding in the states right now and over the next months (there is going to be a collossal stock market crash and a humanitarian crisis from collapsing social security and medicaid) and they will shun any effort to emulate that.... I predict the pro-russian and pro-musk/trump brand will be left in ruins before Christmas. Look at Liz Truss, she has gone state side just in time to kiss the maga ring and associate herself with the financial and social calamity that is about to unfold.
I am sure that rust belt voters will recoil in horror when that message gets hammered home. Labour, centrism and pro-europeanism is being handed an easy win.
'Four in five cars should be electric and half of homes should have heat pumps within 15 years, say the government's independent climate advisers.
By law the UK must reach "net zero" - no longer adding to the total amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere - by 2050.
UK greenhouse gas emissions have more than halved since 1990, largely thanks to less electricity coming from fossil fuels and more from renewables. But the Climate Change Committee (CCC) says that to reach the 2050 target we will also need to change how we drive and heat our homes.
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said the government would consider the advice and respond in due course.'
On topic... what the Fukkers really need are tory defections. To lend some political heft and sustain the impression of (non-majusucle M) momentum.
I doubt Jenners will turn his cloak as he has a realistic expectation of ruling over the smouldering tory rubble left by The Kemster's rapid unscheduled disassembly of the party.
Surely these two collosi deserting the sinking ship will add to the momentum.
I've got the misfortune of being in Basingstoke today (don't ask) and every bloke looks like the top guy (Rag and Bone Man style), whilst clearly being in their 20s.
Bet they have shit tattoos over 30% of their bodies as well.
Tiny cocks as well. Or so I am told by the laydeeez
It is a fat feminised generation. And by no means restricted to the UK. You can see it across the west
There is a plausible argument it is partly down to our environment being flooded with oestrogen - which it is
BP is expected to announce it will slash its renewable energy investments and instead focus on increasing oil and gas production.
The energy giant will outline its strategy later following pressure from some investors unhappy its profits and share price have been much lower than its rivals.
'An Australian radio presenter has left the network after comments he made about the country's women's football team – which have been branded as misogynist and disrespectful.
Marty Sheargold had said on nationwide radio station Triple M that the Matildas players reminded him of "year 10 girls" and implies that their matches were boring.'
'Four in five cars should be electric and half of homes should have heat pumps within 15 years, say the government's independent climate advisers.
By law the UK must reach "net zero" - no longer adding to the total amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere - by 2050.
UK greenhouse gas emissions have more than halved since 1990, largely thanks to less electricity coming from fossil fuels and more from renewables. But the Climate Change Committee (CCC) says that to reach the 2050 target we will also need to change how we drive and heat our homes.
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said the government would consider the advice and respond in due course.'
On topic... what the Fukkers really need are tory defections. To lend some political heft and sustain the impression of (non-majusucle M) momentum.
I doubt Jenners will turn his cloak as he has a realistic expectation of ruling over the smouldering tory rubble left by The Kemster's rapid unscheduled disassembly of the party.
Surely these two collosi deserting the sinking ship will add to the momentum.
I've got the misfortune of being in Basingstoke today (don't ask) and every bloke looks like the top guy (Rag and Bone Man style), whilst clearly being in their 20s.
Bet they have shit tattoos over 30% of their bodies as well.
Tiny cocks as well. Or so I am told by the laydeeez
It is a fat feminised generation. And by no means restricted to the UK. You can see it across the west
There is a plausible argument it is partly down to our environment being flooded with oestrogen - which it is
James Howard Kunstler had an excellent analysis of this phenomenon a decade or so ago
" But the romance of monsterdom is yet another theme in the current caboodle of American manhood. Boys are in love with monsters, and want to be them, or like them, or with them, and nowadays many succeed at that. The indulgence in all these juvenile enthusiasms presents in the absence of any better models of a way to be. The time is not distant when a lot of things are going to shake loose in this land, and when that happens, there will be monsters amongst us everywhere: tattooed clowns in baby clothes with large muscles and weapons. Really, what are the chances that such people reared on dreams of triumphal violence will operate on the basis of kindness, generosity, and consideration of any future beyond the next fifteen minutes."
On topic... what the Fukkers really need are tory defections. To lend some political heft and sustain the impression of (non-majusucle M) momentum.
I doubt Jenners will turn his cloak as he has a realistic expectation of ruling over the smouldering tory rubble left by The Kemster's rapid unscheduled disassembly of the party.
Surely these two collosi deserting the sinking ship will add to the momentum.
This baffles me. One of the Golden Rules of my political lifetime has been that in the aftermath of a General Election, the Liberal/Lib Dem vote implodes. Tanks catastrophically. Six months after the last General Election I would have forecast the Lib Dem vote to be at about 6%, that is, roughly half of what they got on polling day. But now, not only is it not collapsing, but it's rising.
How does that tie in with the Thread Topic on RefUK winning the General Election? Are Reform winning some protest votes from the Lib Dems which are being replaced (and more) by discontented Labour and Conservative voters? How much "churn" is there in these numbers, does anyone know? (Or care?)
Increased defence spending – what will it be spent on? New ships and planes will not be delivered for years, so will they cost anything this year?
To spend the money immediately, a pay rise for all soldiers, sailors and airmen (including lady airmen) would meet the target but not do much to deter Uncle Vlad. It might help end the recruitment and retention crisis, of course.
Or as the new target is a percentage of GDP, the government could attack the problem from the other end by causing a recession.
Or it could follow the Tories' example and just fiddle the figures.
Yes, if it is going to do anything it should be hiring and training more soldiers, and buying things which can be used within a < 5 year time frame. The danger is we just hand it all over to BAE to build things which will be ready in 40 years time.
Actually, BAE makes quite a lot of stuff that can be used quite quickly. Along with the other more problematic kit.
Things that can be done fairly rapidly -
1) purchase ammunition. Stocks of older stuff have been run down - time to actually buy the new. 2) bring forward purchases of existing, produced stuff. Artillery comes to mind. SPGs aren’t especially expensive. 3) bring forward some programs - stuff like smaller missiles. 4) Duct tape programs. Sticking existing stuff together in new ways. See ground launching air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles. There are some lash ups in Ukraine, including converted APCs carrying a whole menu of weapons to be remote requested and fired at the behest of frontline troops
Scale up drone production as per the Ukrainians. Millions a year.
Get legions of spotty youths signed up to REALLY blow shit up. From their bedrooms.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
I thought you had reached that point when the teenager put his feet up on the train seat yesterday and smashed your belief that private school kids were taught etiquette all day.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
I thought you had reached that point when the teenager put his feet up on the train seat yesterday and smashed your belief that private school kids were taught etiquette all day.
As per my usual post on using electoral calculus when polls are like this - it is bollocks. It is set up for a 2 party system with minor other parties. The surge in Reform completely breaks the model.
So just for one example is it credible that the decent increase in the LD vote is going to result in them losing 6 seats by any serious analysis? It isn't. Just comparing the relevant change in LD/Tory percentages should shows gains for the LDs, then there is the increase in tactical voting from Labour voter collapse in the LD/Tory marginals. So simple analysis should show gains for the LDs not loses (regardless of what actually happens). So where have these LD seats gone then if not to the Tories (who are currently actually their main challengers in every one of their 72 seats)? Reform? Labour? Neither of those seem remotely likely.
I suspect the other numbers are way out as well but that is more difficult to analyse.
PS Just seen the breakdown. It seems it is 5 Tory gains and 1 Reform gain. Bonkers.
I suspect the electorate will watch the horror show that is unfolding in the states right now and over the next months (there is going to be a collossal stock market crash and a humanitarian crisis from collapsing social security and medicaid) and they will shun any effort to emulate that.... I predict the pro-russian and pro-musk/trump brand will be left in ruins before Christmas. Look at Liz Truss, she has gone state side just in time to kiss the maga ring and associate herself with the financial and social calamity that is about to unfold.
I am sure that rust belt voters will recoil in horror when that message gets hammered home. Labour, centrism and pro-europeanism is being handed an easy win.
I think there is a risk of recession, indeed was the only one predicting negative growth in the USA in the PB predictions contest.
On the other hand the massive deficit budget passed by the Republican HoR yesterday will in the short term be quite an economic stimulus. Such a deficit is a massive cash injection into the economy. Inflationary certainly, but stimulating in the short term.
It's like an alcoholic having another bottle of 19 Crimes with his lunch, putting off the inevitable crash a bit longer, but ultimately winding up in another pool of vomit in piss stained trousers.
Is there any evidence that foreign aid has produced any positive results over the last 60 years? Or does most of it go in the pockets of autocratic leaders.
Yes, lots of good has been done and it's fairly straightforward to see.
The wealth of autocratic leaders does not come from embezzled aid, not least because very little aid is intergovernmental. Almost all is given via nongovernmental partners.
The vast wealth of corrupt autocrats is nearly all derived from oil and mineral deals with major international mining and petrochemical companies, largely from selling mining and drilling concessions. Much of their wealth is then banked in the City and other western countries Its capitalists not aid workers that fund their lifestyles and armies. It looks like Trump wants to continue this dishonourable tradition.
By which you mean NGOs.
I've reviewed the list posted upthread. My suspicion is that aid, hosed liberally across a spectrum of failed and failing states, achieves very little and is possibly even malign. "Aid" should be specific, targetted, emergency-only and time-limited.
Like with Kids Company, another original Cameron-era trophy that fell apart, I expect this to all come out in reports and scandals in the years to come, just as it did with Camila Batmanghelidjh.
"emergency-only"
How do you define that? Are vaccination campaigns an 'emergency' in your eyes?
An "emergency" is a sudden, unexpected situation that requires immediate action to prevent harm, injury, or danger to people, property, or the environment. They can range from medical crises (new or novel or major disease outbreaks or severe injuries) to natural disasters (earthquakes, fires or floods). In some instances, that might extend to creating safe refuges for people.
I don't think the aid budget should be used to permanently sustain vaccination programmes in other countries, unless we have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease.
Don’t we usually have a direct national interest in the global suppression of a disease? Infectious diseases do not respect international borders.
In many instances, yes, but not always - such as some tropical diseases.
That may come under the aegis of the WHO or other NGOs but I don't think the UK government should be more widely cross-subsidising the healthcare of other countries.
The UK is the leader in vaccination programmes through Malaria Action, GAVI, etc. It is the single most impactful intervention in human health anywhere in the world.
Many of these countries simply can’t afford these programmes - they need food and water for their citizens first.
I’m pretty right wing. But this is both a good use of money and the right thing to do
The attempt to say a halving of overseas aid (which is what this is) won't have casualties is not credible.
Half of the aid budget is international subscriptions like the WHO. A quarter is on housing asylum seekers in the UK. A quarter is on Direct aid from the UK, half of it to Africa.
We could withdraw from WHO and similar, and have a blanket amnesty for all asylum seekers, including prospectively.
That is the way to make the sums add up if we want to cut £13 billion from the aid budget and spend it on defence.
We do not need to amnesty asylum seekers - just rescind May's idiotic ruling that they couldn't work while applying. If there are any policies in the last couple of decades that have managed to be as simultaneously vicious, pointless and self-destructive, I can't think of them.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
I thought you had reached that point when the teenager put his feet up on the train seat yesterday and smashed your belief that private school kids were taught etiquette all day.
These comments from Cleverly and Mitchell highlight the battle between the Tories and Lib Dems for the votes of decent people while Labour and Reform fight for the populist crown:
The government’s decision to cut aid to unprecedentedly low levels is short-sighted and damaging. Increasing defence spending is right, but doing so at the expense of health and security risks to the UK, on the backs of the world’s poorest is, plain and simply, wrong.
This baffles me. One of the Golden Rules of my political lifetime has been that in the aftermath of a General Election, the Liberal/Lib Dem vote implodes. Tanks catastrophically. Six months after the last General Election I would have forecast the Lib Dem vote to be at about 6%, that is, roughly half of what they got on polling day. But now, not only is it not collapsing, but it's rising.
How does that tie in with the Thread Topic on RefUK winning the General Election? Are Reform winning some protest votes from the Lib Dems which are being replaced (and more) by discontented Labour and Conservative voters? How much "churn" is there in these numbers, does anyone know? (Or care?)
I would guess it's sane/centrist Tories not impressed by Kemi, plus a few from Lab and a tactical vote unwind (being between elections). On the last, that may have gone the other way in previous elections with tactical LD voters instead saying their real party.
I voted Lab, as they were the potential winners in my seat. I'd probably answer a VI poll with Lib Dem (they're probably closest party to my views on many things*) even though I'll most likely vote Lab** if in the same seat at the next election.
Still, it is a marked difference to the past.
*Liberalism, though I'm not a fan of them on IHT or WFA at the moment *LDs are nowhere here. I might even vote Labour with enthusiasm if they deliver on housing/long term investment and green crap
I suspect the electorate will watch the horror show that is unfolding in the states right now and over the next months (there is going to be a collossal stock market crash and a humanitarian crisis from collapsing social security and medicaid) and they will shun any effort to emulate that.... I predict the pro-russian and pro-musk/trump brand will be left in ruins before Christmas. Look at Liz Truss, she has gone state side just in time to kiss the maga ring and associate herself with the financial and social calamity that is about to unfold.
I am sure that rust belt voters will recoil in horror when that message gets hammered home. Labour, centrism and pro-europeanism is being handed an easy win.
I think there is a risk of recession, indeed was the only one predicting negative growth in the USA in the PB predictions contest.
On the other hand the massive deficit budget passed by the Republican HoR yesterday will in the short term be quite an economic stimulus. Such a deficit is a massive cash injection into the economy. Inflationary certainly, but stimulating in the short term.
It's like an alcoholic having another bottle of 19 Crimes with his lunch, putting off the inevitable crash a bit longer, but ultimately winding up in another pool of vomit in piss stained trousers.
The usual US electoral mega-cycle is for the Democrats to inherit the worst excesses of GOP profligacy, and for the recalcitrant GOP Congress (elected in the midterms) to impose a strict debt ceiling on them.
These comments from Cleverly and Mitchell highlight the battle between the Tories and Lib Dems for the votes of decent people while Labour and Reform fight for the populist crown:
The government’s decision to cut aid to unprecedentedly low levels is short-sighted and damaging. Increasing defence spending is right, but doing so at the expense of health and security risks to the UK, on the backs of the world’s poorest is, plain and simply, wrong.
Why aren't the Spin Doctors selling the concept of Arms for Ukraine as a special kind of Aid from the 0.7% of GDP budget?
I suspect the electorate will watch the horror show that is unfolding in the states right now and over the next months (there is going to be a collossal stock market crash and a humanitarian crisis from collapsing social security and medicaid) and they will shun any effort to emulate that.... I predict the pro-russian and pro-musk/trump brand will be left in ruins before Christmas. Look at Liz Truss, she has gone state side just in time to kiss the maga ring and associate herself with the financial and social calamity that is about to unfold.
I am sure that rust belt voters will recoil in horror when that message gets hammered home. Labour, centrism and pro-europeanism is being handed an easy win.
I think there is a risk of recession, indeed was the only one predicting negative growth in the USA in the PB predictions contest.
On the other hand the massive deficit budget passed by the Republican HoR yesterday will in the short term be quite an economic stimulus. Such a deficit is a massive cash injection into the economy. Inflationary certainly, but stimulating in the short term.
It's like an alcoholic having another bottle of 19 Crimes with his lunch, putting off the inevitable crash a bit longer, but ultimately winding up in another pool of vomit in piss stained trousers.
Yes, suspect the recession will wait a little but who knows... the tariffs and job lay offs could bring it forward.
I think Sunil was closest (perhaps tied) on German election results? I overestimated AfD.
This baffles me. One of the Golden Rules of my political lifetime has been that in the aftermath of a General Election, the Liberal/Lib Dem vote implodes. Tanks catastrophically. Six months after the last General Election I would have forecast the Lib Dem vote to be at about 6%, that is, roughly half of what they got on polling day. But now, not only is it not collapsing, but it's rising.
How does that tie in with the Thread Topic on RefUK winning the General Election? Are Reform winning some protest votes from the Lib Dems which are being replaced (and more) by discontented Labour and Conservative voters? How much "churn" is there in these numbers, does anyone know? (Or care?)
From the YouGov tables:
Lib Dems have exceptionally strong retention of their '24 vote. Reform are similar.
Lib Dems are picking up some Conservative:Labour voters at a ratio of 1:2.
Reform are the inverse, 2:1, but picking up twice as many voters from other parties as the Lib Dems
These comments from Cleverly and Mitchell highlight the battle between the Tories and Lib Dems for the votes of decent people while Labour and Reform fight for the populist crown:
The government’s decision to cut aid to unprecedentedly low levels is short-sighted and damaging. Increasing defence spending is right, but doing so at the expense of health and security risks to the UK, on the backs of the world’s poorest is, plain and simply, wrong.
Why aren't the Spin Doctors selling the concept of Arms for Ukraine as a special kind of Aid from the 0.7% of GDP budget?
0.5% of GNI, not 0.7%.
I think it reasonable to include our humanitarian and economic aid to Ukraine in the total, but not the military aid.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
I thought you had reached that point when the teenager put his feet up on the train seat yesterday and smashed your belief that private school kids were taught etiquette all day.
These comments from Cleverly and Mitchell highlight the battle between the Tories and Lib Dems for the votes of decent people while Labour and Reform fight for the populist crown:
The government’s decision to cut aid to unprecedentedly low levels is short-sighted and damaging. Increasing defence spending is right, but doing so at the expense of health and security risks to the UK, on the backs of the world’s poorest is, plain and simply, wrong.
Why aren't the Spin Doctors selling the concept of Arms for Ukraine as a special kind of Aid from the 0.7% of GDP budget?
Because the whole point is to raise headline defence spending. If there's any sleight of hand it's more likely to be the other way, looking for 'aid' spending that can be reclassified as defence.
These comments from Cleverly and Mitchell highlight the battle between the Tories and Lib Dems for the votes of decent people while Labour and Reform fight for the populist crown:
The government’s decision to cut aid to unprecedentedly low levels is short-sighted and damaging. Increasing defence spending is right, but doing so at the expense of health and security risks to the UK, on the backs of the world’s poorest is, plain and simply, wrong.
Why aren't the Spin Doctors selling the concept of Arms for Ukraine as a special kind of Aid from the 0.7% of GDP budget?
0.5% of GNI, not 0.7%.
I think it reasonable to include our humanitarian and economic aid to Ukraine in the total, but not the military aid.
0.7% was the Cameron era figure, before Johnson and Starmer started cutting it.
'An Australian radio presenter has left the network after comments he made about the country's women's football team – which have been branded as misogynist and disrespectful.
Marty Sheargold had said on nationwide radio station Triple M that the Matildas players reminded him of "year 10 girls" and implies that their matches were boring.'
One of the worst things about women's football is that the commentators and journalists have to be constantly positive and never negative, despite the dross sometimes on display.
Swap 'year 10 girls' for 'school boy' or similar and no-one would bat an eyelid.
No-one has any issues slagging off a crap quality men's match. It's expected and warranted. For women's football to be taken seriously, it has to be subject to scrutiny, not pretending every game is scintillating. It isn't, a lot of it is shit, even at national level. As men's football can be.
This baffles me. One of the Golden Rules of my political lifetime has been that in the aftermath of a General Election, the Liberal/Lib Dem vote implodes. Tanks catastrophically. Six months after the last General Election I would have forecast the Lib Dem vote to be at about 6%, that is, roughly half of what they got on polling day. But now, not only is it not collapsing, but it's rising.
How does that tie in with the Thread Topic on RefUK winning the General Election? Are Reform winning some protest votes from the Lib Dems which are being replaced (and more) by discontented Labour and Conservative voters? How much "churn" is there in these numbers, does anyone know? (Or care?)
From the YouGov tables:
Lib Dems have exceptionally strong retention of their '24 vote. Reform are similar.
Lib Dems are picking up some Conservative:Labour voters at a ratio of 1:2.
Reform are the inverse, 2:1, but picking up twice as many voters from other parties as the Lib Dems
Think this is called hedging your bets. The last three moreincommon polls have had Labour, Reform and now Conservative leads. At this rate, maybe Lib Dems will be next.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
I thought you had reached that point when the teenager put his feet up on the train seat yesterday and smashed your belief that private school kids were taught etiquette all day.
Sounds like that asteroid can’t hit soon enough.
For all the horror of this I feel the same about the ghastly ceremony of handing over dead hostages staged by Hamas last week. No winners in any of this.
This baffles me. One of the Golden Rules of my political lifetime has been that in the aftermath of a General Election, the Liberal/Lib Dem vote implodes. Tanks catastrophically. Six months after the last General Election I would have forecast the Lib Dem vote to be at about 6%, that is, roughly half of what they got on polling day. But now, not only is it not collapsing, but it's rising.
How does that tie in with the Thread Topic on RefUK winning the General Election? Are Reform winning some protest votes from the Lib Dems which are being replaced (and more) by discontented Labour and Conservative voters? How much "churn" is there in these numbers, does anyone know? (Or care?)
From the YouGov tables:
Lib Dems have exceptionally strong retention of their '24 vote. Reform are similar.
Lib Dems are picking up some Conservative:Labour voters at a ratio of 1:2.
Reform are the inverse, 2:1, but picking up twice as many voters from other parties as the Lib Dems
Labour generally have poor voter retention.
That's very helpful and informative, thank you!
Treat with caution, particularly mixing up absolute figures and percentages.
The other interesting thing is Reform have now effectively replaced the Tories in Wales in a way they haven't (yet) in any region of England. I'm using Yougovs sample limit of 100 respondents for this.
Didn't the value ramp up in the lead up to the vote (and after vote before inauguration) in the expectation that Trump would be good for his 'first buddy's' business prospects?* That was nuts, of course, but any Trump-cost needs to be compared to the pre-Trump boost figure.
We're still higher than 5 November, I think. Once we fall below that, it becomes more real actual Trump cost rather than absence of Trump boost.
*I mean - Trump boosting electric cars? But still.
This baffles me. One of the Golden Rules of my political lifetime has been that in the aftermath of a General Election, the Liberal/Lib Dem vote implodes. Tanks catastrophically. Six months after the last General Election I would have forecast the Lib Dem vote to be at about 6%, that is, roughly half of what they got on polling day. But now, not only is it not collapsing, but it's rising.
How does that tie in with the Thread Topic on RefUK winning the General Election? Are Reform winning some protest votes from the Lib Dems which are being replaced (and more) by discontented Labour and Conservative voters? How much "churn" is there in these numbers, does anyone know? (Or care?)
From the YouGov tables:
Lib Dems have exceptionally strong retention of their '24 vote. Reform are similar.
Lib Dems are picking up some Conservative:Labour voters at a ratio of 1:2.
Reform are the inverse, 2:1, but picking up twice as many voters from other parties as the Lib Dems
Labour generally have poor voter retention.
That's very helpful and informative, thank you!
Treat with caution, particularly mixing up absolute figures and percentages.
The other interesting thing is Reform have now effectively replaced the Tories in Wales in a way they haven't (yet) in any region of England. I'm using Yougovs sample limit of 100 respondents for this.
Noted. (we have all heard the sermon on the evils of sub-samples!)
Think this is called hedging your bets. The last three moreincommon polls have had Labour, Reform and now Conservative leads. At this rate, maybe Lib Dems will be next.
That really would be 'cat, meet some pigeons'. Back to the heady early days of the Alliance.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
I thought you had reached that point when the teenager put his feet up on the train seat yesterday and smashed your belief that private school kids were taught etiquette all day.
Sounds like that asteroid can’t hit soon enough.
For all the horror of this I feel the same about the ghastly ceremony of handing over dead hostages staged by Hamas last week. No winners in any of this.
Reforms prospects are linked to just how crazy the next 4 years are with Trump . There must be some nervousness at Reform HQ .
Labour can’t attack Trump so will go after Reform on Putin .
The problem everyone has is that Trump isn't reliable. He doesn't seem to have a strategy, just a hazy idea of where he wants to go, and where he wants to be, and as far as the latter is concerned, that varies.
Think this is called hedging your bets. The last three moreincommon polls have had Labour, Reform and now Conservative leads. At this rate, maybe Lib Dems will be next.
Reforms prospects are linked to just how crazy the next 4 years are with Trump . There must be some nervousness at Reform HQ .
Labour can’t attack Trump so will go after Reform on Putin .
The problem everyone has is that Trump isn't reliable. He doesn't seem to have a strategy, just a hazy idea of where he wants to go, and where he wants to be, and as far as the latter is concerned, that varies.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
We are witnessing something quite evil imo. All courtesy of around 250k swing state voters in America.
I mean, there maybe is a case for making Canada part of the States. A fresh influx of largely sane voters
Perhaps that's the source of MAGA antipathy towards Canada. It's a big chunk of "woke liberal elite" looking down on them, both geographically and metaphorically.
Reforms prospects are linked to just how crazy the next 4 years are with Trump . There must be some nervousness at Reform HQ .
Labour can’t attack Trump so will go after Reform on Putin .
The problem everyone has is that Trump isn't reliable. He doesn't seem to have a strategy, just a hazy idea of where he wants to go, and where he wants to be, and as far as the latter is concerned, that varies.
These comments from Cleverly and Mitchell highlight the battle between the Tories and Lib Dems for the votes of decent people while Labour and Reform fight for the populist crown:
The government’s decision to cut aid to unprecedentedly low levels is short-sighted and damaging. Increasing defence spending is right, but doing so at the expense of health and security risks to the UK, on the backs of the world’s poorest is, plain and simply, wrong.
Why aren't the Spin Doctors selling the concept of Arms for Ukraine as a special kind of Aid from the 0.7% of GDP budget?
0.5% of GNI, not 0.7%.
I think it reasonable to include our humanitarian and economic aid to Ukraine in the total, but not the military aid.
0.7% was the Cameron era figure, before Johnson and Starmer started cutting it.
It's actually a Harold Wilson era figure - from a 1969 report based on Soviet-inspired economic models (which stated that developing countries needed an investment rate of 12-15% of GDP to converge). A revised modelling exercise in 2005 using modern methods and data reduced the 0.7% estimate to 0.01%.
But by then the 0.7% figure had got into people's minds, despite abundant evidence that pervasive corruption, lack of the rule of law, absent property rights and so on are the hurdles to investment in developing countries, not a lack of cash.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
We are witnessing something quite evil imo. All courtesy of around 250k swing state voters in America.
I mean, there maybe is a case for making Canada part of the States. A fresh influx of largely sane voters
Perhaps that's the source of MAGA antipathy towards Canada. It's a big chunk of "woke liberal elite" looking down on them, both geographically and metaphorically.
If America falls and becomes an anti-liberal, non-functioning democracy then I fear that, like Putin, they will not want to tolerate their citizens seeing other functioning democracies and wondering whether life would be better. Canada is nearest in the firing line on that score.
As per my usual post on using electoral calculus when polls are like this - it is bollocks. It is set up for a 2 party system with minor other parties. The surge in Reform completely breaks the model.
So just for one example is it credible that the decent increase in the LD vote is going to result in them losing 6 seats by any serious analysis? It isn't. Just comparing the relevant change in LD/Tory percentages should shows gains for the LDs, then there is the increase in tactical voting from Labour voter collapse in the LD/Tory marginals. So simple analysis should show gains for the LDs not loses (regardless of what actually happens). So where have these LD seats gone then if not to the Tories (who are currently actually their main challengers in every one of their 72 seats)? Reform? Labour? Neither of those seem remotely likely.
I suspect the other numbers are way out as well but that is more difficult to analyse.
PS Just seen the breakdown. It seems it is 5 Tory gains and 1 Reform gain. Bonkers.
The model is wrong. I was also playing about with it and getting nonsense, so I entered exactly unchanged vote shares from the last GE and got:
L 400 C 153 LD 55 Ref 4 G 3
So clearly a pro-Conservative bias in the base data which is not the GE result.
There are also some changes between the GE and now within the minor parties in the model but I don't see how I can change that, but the effect overall is inconsequential.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
We are witnessing something quite evil imo. All courtesy of around 250k swing state voters in America.
I mean, there maybe is a case for making Canada part of the States. A fresh influx of largely sane voters
Perhaps that's the source of MAGA antipathy towards Canada. It's a big chunk of "woke liberal elite" looking down on them, both geographically and metaphorically.
And they own almost as many guns as the Yanquis but manage not go around shooting up each other’s kids to anywhere near the same degree, the sanctimonious bastards.
As per my usual post on using electoral calculus when polls are like this - it is bollocks. It is set up for a 2 party system with minor other parties. The surge in Reform completely breaks the model.
So just for one example is it credible that the decent increase in the LD vote is going to result in them losing 6 seats by any serious analysis? It isn't. Just comparing the relevant change in LD/Tory percentages should shows gains for the LDs, then there is the increase in tactical voting from Labour voter collapse in the LD/Tory marginals. So simple analysis should show gains for the LDs not loses (regardless of what actually happens). So where have these LD seats gone then if not to the Tories (who are currently actually their main challengers in every one of their 72 seats)? Reform? Labour? Neither of those seem remotely likely.
I suspect the other numbers are way out as well but that is more difficult to analyse.
PS Just seen the breakdown. It seems it is 5 Tory gains and 1 Reform gain. Bonkers.
The model is wrong. I was also playing about with it and getting nonsense, so I entered exactly unchanged vote shares from the last GE and got:
L 400 C 153 LD 55 Ref 4 G 3
So clearly a pro-Conservative bias in the base data which is not the GE result.
There are also some changes between the GE and now within the minor parties in the model but I don't see how I can change that, but the effect overall is inconsequential.
Had a look at the detail, it has Labour winning Cheadle from the LDs when in fact they are over 30 points behind. They must be using some weird MRP data making assumptions about movements since the GE as their baseline.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
I thought you had reached that point when the teenager put his feet up on the train seat yesterday and smashed your belief that private school kids were taught etiquette all day.
Sounds like that asteroid can’t hit soon enough.
Every day is a fresh lesson in human depravity.
We are a heinous species. It’s hard, not to despair of human nature.
Reforms prospects are linked to just how crazy the next 4 years are with Trump . There must be some nervousness at Reform HQ .
Labour can’t attack Trump so will go after Reform on Putin .
An interesting thought. There will be a Trump proxy war in British domestic politics. Labour can’t attack Trump directly, so they will attack Reform (and the Tories if they go off on a MAGA culture war tangent). And the Lib Dems will attack Trump.
I notice the rookies at McLaren and Red Bull were fastest in the opening testing session this morning. Which @Morris_Dancer will probably say shows how little testing times on the first day tell you about the potential of the cars.
Only a small shift, but I wonder if we’re starting to see Reform to Con movement, based upon attitudes to Trump/Putin.
Yes, I reckon so. Not necessarily because of attitudes to Putin, more rallying round the flag at a time of danger. The Tories still have that comforting brand of continuity in the face of turmoil, no matter how undeserved since 2016.
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
We are witnessing something quite evil imo. All courtesy of around 250k swing state voters in America.
I mean, there maybe is a case for making Canada part of the States. A fresh influx of largely sane voters
Perhaps that's the source of MAGA antipathy towards Canada. It's a big chunk of "woke liberal elite" looking down on them, both geographically and metaphorically.
And they own almost as many guns as the Yanquis but manage not go around shooting up each other’s kids to anywhere near the same degree, the sanctimonious bastards.
This baffles me. One of the Golden Rules of my political lifetime has been that in the aftermath of a General Election, the Liberal/Lib Dem vote implodes. Tanks catastrophically. Six months after the last General Election I would have forecast the Lib Dem vote to be at about 6%, that is, roughly half of what they got on polling day. But now, not only is it not collapsing, but it's rising.
How does that tie in with the Thread Topic on RefUK winning the General Election? Are Reform winning some protest votes from the Lib Dems which are being replaced (and more) by discontented Labour and Conservative voters? How much "churn" is there in these numbers, does anyone know? (Or care?)
Having got their third party status back the Lib Dems are a lot more visible post election than in recent years. Davey can get media coverage for interventions at PMQs, there are Lib Dem select committee members to act as talking heads etc. Also there are just more Lib Dem MPs churning out local leaflets and dominating local news coverage.
This baffles me. One of the Golden Rules of my political lifetime has been that in the aftermath of a General Election, the Liberal/Lib Dem vote implodes. Tanks catastrophically. Six months after the last General Election I would have forecast the Lib Dem vote to be at about 6%, that is, roughly half of what they got on polling day. But now, not only is it not collapsing, but it's rising.
How does that tie in with the Thread Topic on RefUK winning the General Election? Are Reform winning some protest votes from the Lib Dems which are being replaced (and more) by discontented Labour and Conservative voters? How much "churn" is there in these numbers, does anyone know? (Or care?)
From the YouGov tables:
Lib Dems have exceptionally strong retention of their '24 vote. Reform are similar.
Lib Dems are picking up some Conservative:Labour voters at a ratio of 1:2.
Reform are the inverse, 2:1, but picking up twice as many voters from other parties as the Lib Dems
Labour generally have poor voter retention.
That's very helpful and informative, thank you!
Treat with caution, particularly mixing up absolute figures and percentages.
The other interesting thing is Reform have now effectively replaced the Tories in Wales in a way they haven't (yet) in any region of England. I'm using Yougovs sample limit of 100 respondents for this.
Given the Tory vote in Wales had already collapsed by the time of the last election, the recent polling in Wlaes is surely more a reflection of Reform replacing Labour?
President Trump shares a video of an AI vision for the Gaza Strip, ends with Trump having drinks at a pool with Benjamin Netanyahu.
This video marks the point where I go from fearing the end of human civilisation to welcoming it.
We are witnessing something quite evil imo. All courtesy of around 250k swing state voters in America.
I mean, there maybe is a case for making Canada part of the States. A fresh influx of largely sane voters
Perhaps that's the source of MAGA antipathy towards Canada. It's a big chunk of "woke liberal elite" looking down on them, both geographically and metaphorically.
And they own almost as many guns as the Yanquis but manage not go around shooting up each other’s kids to anywhere near the same degree, the sanctimonious bastards.
It’s a sort of unilateral civil war. Canada being a proxy for the now defeated Democrats.
Very similar to Russia-Ukraine relations since 2014.
Comments
SDP/Lib Alliance in England 6.25 million votes, 10 MPs
Labour in Scotland 1.25 million votes, 50 MPs
reverse proportions!
1) purchase ammunition. Stocks of older stuff have been run down - time to actually buy the new.
2) bring forward purchases of existing, produced stuff. Artillery comes to mind. SPGs aren’t especially expensive.
3) bring forward some programs - stuff like smaller missiles.
4) Duct tape programs. Sticking existing stuff together in new ways. See ground launching air-to-air and air-to-ground missiles. There are some lash ups in Ukraine, including converted APCs carrying a whole menu of weapons to be remote requested and fired at the behest of frontline troops
https://x.com/jamescleverly/status/1894661350321778715
Increased defence spending is right, cutting the ODA budget is a mistake!
Rather than cut the bloated welfare bill, or the number of civil servants, or GBEnergy, Starmer took the “easy option” stripping money from the poorest in the world and undermining our global influence.
*that being my first impression, what with the beards, I don't wish to misgender, of course!
However, I'm not convinced on the evidence that there's a direct link between our aid and a reduction in terrorism in East Africa, I'm afraid. And there are plenty of countries where women are educated, like China or Russia, who still seem to develop security threats to this country.
I'm far more convinced by the work of the security services, both at home and overseas.
🌳 CON 25% (+2)
➡️ REF UK 24% (-2)
🌹 LAB 23% (-2)
🔶 LIB DEM 16% (+4)
🌍 GREEN 8% (+1)
🟡 SNP 3%(-)
https://x.com/luketryl/status/1894662426076799297?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
Mortar rounds: unglamorous, but there's been a dearth of them in Ukraine.
For the longer term, we should be looking at collaboration with Europe for key defence technologies. If the US does end up completely disengaged, we need to be able to replicate some of the stuff they can do and we currently cannot.
That's a long term project, which is all the more reason it needs to start now.
I've got the misfortune of being in Basingstoke today (don't ask) and every bloke looks like the top guy (Rag and Bone Man style), whilst clearly being in their 20s.
Bet they have shit tattoos over 30% of their bodies as well.
We are talking starvation
https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/republican-snap-proposals-could-take-food-away-from-millions-of-low-income
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/02/25/us/politics/medicaid-cuts-republican-budget.html
I am sure that rust belt voters will recoil in horror when that message gets hammered home. Labour, centrism and pro-europeanism is being handed an easy win.
By law the UK must reach "net zero" - no longer adding to the total amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere - by 2050.
UK greenhouse gas emissions have more than halved since 1990, largely thanks to less electricity coming from fossil fuels and more from renewables. But the Climate Change Committee (CCC) says that to reach the 2050 target we will also need to change how we drive and heat our homes.
Energy Secretary Ed Miliband said the government would consider the advice and respond in due course.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c70ekknr2rwo
It is a fat feminised generation. And by no means restricted to the UK. You can see it across the west
There is a plausible argument it is partly down to our environment being flooded with oestrogen - which it is
The energy giant will outline its strategy later following pressure from some investors unhappy its profits and share price have been much lower than its rivals.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3374ekd11po
Marty Sheargold had said on nationwide radio station Triple M that the Matildas players reminded him of "year 10 girls" and implies that their matches were boring.'
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cg5dym4ye30o
Reporter: Who is the DOGE administrator?
Leavitt: I'm not going to reveal the name of that individual from this podium.
https://x.com/Acyn/status/1894458876059422847
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/fcgi-bin/usercode.py?scotcontrol=N&CON=25&LAB=23&LIB=16&Reform=24&Green=8&UKIP=&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVReform=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTReform=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2024base
" But the romance of monsterdom is yet another theme in the current caboodle of American manhood. Boys are in love with monsters, and want to be them, or like them, or with them, and nowadays many succeed at that. The indulgence in all these juvenile enthusiasms presents in the absence of any better models of a way to be. The time is not distant when a lot of things are going to shake loose in this land, and when that happens, there will be monsters amongst us everywhere: tattooed clowns in baby clothes with large muscles and weapons. Really, what are the chances that such people reared on dreams of triumphal violence will operate on the basis of kindness, generosity, and consideration of any future beyond the next fifteen minutes."
https://www.kunstler.com/p/warrior-land
He writes very well by the way.
P.s. The whole women run everything is total bullshit.... I can't imagine anything less manly than trying to be the victim.
And Good Morning one and all.
"Not telling...so there!"
History will file the start of 2025 under "WTAF???"
How does that tie in with the Thread Topic on RefUK winning the General Election? Are Reform winning some protest votes from the Lib Dems which are being replaced (and more) by discontented Labour and Conservative voters? How much "churn" is there in these numbers, does anyone know? (Or care?)
Get legions of spotty youths signed up to REALLY blow shit up. From their bedrooms.
Sounds like that asteroid can’t hit soon enough.
So just for one example is it credible that the decent increase in the LD vote is going to result in them losing 6 seats by any serious analysis? It isn't. Just comparing the relevant change in LD/Tory percentages should shows gains for the LDs, then there is the increase in tactical voting from Labour voter collapse in the LD/Tory marginals. So simple analysis should show gains for the LDs not loses (regardless of what actually happens). So where have these LD seats gone then if not to the Tories (who are currently actually their main challengers in every one of their 72 seats)? Reform? Labour? Neither of those seem remotely likely.
I suspect the other numbers are way out as well but that is more difficult to analyse.
PS Just seen the breakdown. It seems it is 5 Tory gains and 1 Reform gain. Bonkers.
On the other hand the massive deficit budget passed by the Republican HoR yesterday will in the short term be quite an economic stimulus. Such a deficit is a massive cash injection into the economy. Inflationary certainly, but stimulating in the short term.
It's like an alcoholic having another bottle of 19 Crimes with his lunch, putting off the inevitable crash a bit longer, but ultimately winding up in another pool of vomit in piss stained trousers.
https://x.com/andrewmitchmp/status/1894445350863171856
The government’s decision to cut aid to unprecedentedly low levels is short-sighted and damaging. Increasing defence spending is right, but doing so at the expense of health and security risks to the UK, on the backs of the world’s poorest is, plain and simply, wrong.
I voted Lab, as they were the potential winners in my seat. I'd probably answer a VI poll with Lib Dem (they're probably closest party to my views on many things*) even though I'll most likely vote Lab** if in the same seat at the next election.
Still, it is a marked difference to the past.
*Liberalism, though I'm not a fan of them on IHT or WFA at the moment
*LDs are nowhere here. I might even vote Labour with enthusiasm if they deliver on housing/long term investment and green crap
I think Sunil was closest (perhaps tied) on German election results?
I overestimated AfD.
Tesla Has Lost $400 Billion In Value During Trump Presidency. What the Charts Say Comes Next.
https://www.barrons.com/articles/tesla-stock-value-trump-eb339749
I think it reasonable to include our humanitarian and economic aid to Ukraine in the total, but not the military aid.
Swap 'year 10 girls' for 'school boy' or similar and no-one would bat an eyelid.
No-one has any issues slagging off a crap quality men's match. It's expected and warranted. For women's football to be taken seriously, it has to be subject to scrutiny, not pretending every game is scintillating. It isn't, a lot of it is shit, even at national level. As men's football can be.
The other interesting thing is Reform have now effectively replaced the Tories in Wales in a way they haven't (yet) in any region of England. I'm using Yougovs sample limit of 100 respondents for this.
We're still higher than 5 November, I think. Once we fall below that, it becomes more real actual Trump cost rather than absence of Trump boost.
*I mean
Labour can’t attack Trump so will go after Reform on Putin .
https://www.astroforge.com/updates/mission-2-overview
Along with the cozying up to Russia:
https://x.com/LukeDCoffey/status/1894531798660469048
https://www.cgdev.org/publication/ghost-07-origins-and-relevance-international-aid-target-working-paper-68
But by then the 0.7% figure had got into people's minds, despite abundant evidence that pervasive corruption, lack of the rule of law, absent property rights and so on are the hurdles to investment in developing countries, not a lack of cash.
L 400
C 153
LD 55
Ref 4
G 3
So clearly a pro-Conservative bias in the base data which is not the GE result.
There are also some changes between the GE and now within the minor parties in the model but I don't see how I can change that, but the effect overall is inconsequential.
Which @Morris_Dancer will probably say shows how little testing times on the first day tell you about the potential of the cars.
Very similar to Russia-Ukraine relations since 2014.