And incidentally the public toilet next to that war memorial, which I dutifully used yesterday, has been voted the most beautiful toilet building in the world (which I guess is a relatively low bar?):
Suspicious lack of interior shots. Pieces of atrophied chewing gum jostling the toilet cubes in the pissoir, toilet roll holders that refuse to dispense toilet roll and an overwhelming smell of Rakfisk?
They’re normally concrete and stainless steel, and pretty clean and functional.
The biggest problem they have is dodgy camper van users unloading their chemical toilets into them - the first one I used yesterday in Lofoten was completely blocked and I’d guess that was why. Up here on the tourist trail, the area attracts a fair few numpties, sadly. Not long off the ferry, we were held up waiting to get past a stranded VW camper van, which some bright spark had decided to reverse off the road (or was crap in doing a three pointer) whereupon the rear wheels had sunk into the roadside ditch.
Just like Scotland. What is it about campervanners? They pay £100k for a vehicle and are too mean to pay £10 to empty their shit cassette in an official facility. I wonder whether, when they are at home, do they shit in a chamber pot and throw the contents over next door’s garden? Rant over.
And incidentally the public toilet next to that war memorial, which I dutifully used yesterday, has been voted the most beautiful toilet building in the world (which I guess is a relatively low bar?):
Suspicious lack of interior shots. Pieces of atrophied chewing gum jostling the toilet cubes in the pissoir, toilet roll holders that refuse to dispense toilet roll and an overwhelming smell of Rakfisk?
They’re normally concrete and stainless steel, and pretty clean and functional.
The biggest problem they have is dodgy camper van users unloading their chemical toilets into them - the first one I used yesterday in Lofoten was completely blocked and I’d guess that was why. Up here on the tourist trail, the area attracts a fair few numpties, sadly. Not long off the ferry, we were held up waiting to get past a stranded VW camper van, which some bright spark had decided to reverse off the road (or was crap in doing a three pointer) whereupon the rear wheels had sunk into the roadside ditch.
Just like Scotland. What is it about campervanners? They pay £100k for a vehicle and are too mean to pay £10 to empty their shit cassette in an official facility. I wonder whether, when they are at home, do they shit in a chamber pot and throw the contents over next door’s garden? Rant over.
That's exactly the same mentality as doggers tying their pooh-bags onto trees rather than take them to the nearest pooh bin, or the mounds of litter found next to every motorway or layby in the country.
The boss of Yorkshire Water received a bonus of £371,000 on top of her base salary of £585,000 last year
The water companies have made a killing, but done so under an EU legal framework that de facto banned new water infrastructure. We still have that today. Droughts in the summer and floods in the winter are policy.
If water companies are banned from new infrastructure what the fuck have Wessex Water been doing for 9 months in the middle of Warminster.
Why do I suspect your interpretation of the facts is somewhat suspect?
Tbf, I have been asking myself that question every time I drive through Hagley in Worcestershire where whatever the gas pipe company is called this week has just dug up the road for the seventh time in the last two and a half years.
My favourite is when a Welsh council resurfaces an A road for the first time in 25 years and no sooner has the last road roller left, Dwr Cymru send in their contractors to dig a five mile trench along the new surface. They leave and Openreach put in fibre cables between two villages. Not to miss out National Grid and British Gas take their turn.
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
The contrast between year one of Starmer's government and year one of Blair's is quite telling.
Within the first 12 months Blair had passed many changes that he wanted. Devolution, BoE independence, minimum wage etc etc etc all happened in the first 12 months.
What the hell has Starmer done? Announcements that planning will be changed. Announcements that this, that or the other will happen.
Where are the changes? We could have had a new planning system in place by now.
They are certainly too timid and cautious. I kind of think they are on the right track in some policy areas but that they themselves are uncertain and lack belief in what they need to change, so end up neither going fast enough nor far enough.
Their communications are very poor. Even if they achieve a win they allow it to be sold as a defeat. Some of the " trade deals" could be seen as more of a win than a loss. Deals are a negotiation that encompasses wins and losses. This bunch allow the Tory media to focus on the downs but make no attempt themselves to promote the ups.
They didn't make enough of their legacy. They needed a Liam Byrne note to keep them afloat for a decade. I am sure they found plenty, but being naive and useless sent them all to the dumpster rather than the Guardian.
Yes, they are probably 5/10 for governing and 1/10 for politics and comms.
And incidentally the public toilet next to that war memorial, which I dutifully used yesterday, has been voted the most beautiful toilet building in the world (which I guess is a relatively low bar?):
Suspicious lack of interior shots. Pieces of atrophied chewing gum jostling the toilet cubes in the pissoir, toilet roll holders that refuse to dispense toilet roll and an overwhelming smell of Rakfisk?
They’re normally concrete and stainless steel, and pretty clean and functional.
The biggest problem they have is dodgy camper van users unloading their chemical toilets into them - the first one I used yesterday in Lofoten was completely blocked and I’d guess that was why. Up here on the tourist trail, the area attracts a fair few numpties, sadly. Not long off the ferry, we were held up waiting to get past a stranded VW camper van, which some bright spark had decided to reverse off the road (or was crap in doing a three pointer) whereupon the rear wheels had sunk into the roadside ditch.
Just like Scotland. What is it about campervanners? They pay £100k for a vehicle and are too mean to pay £10 to empty their shit cassette in an official facility. I wonder whether, when they are at home, do they shit in a chamber pot and throw the contents over next door’s garden? Rant over.
That's exactly the same mentality as doggers tying their pooh-bags onto trees rather than take them to the nearest pooh bin, or the mounds of litter found next to every motorway or layby in the country.
'Doggers tying their pooh-bags onto trees' made me do a double-take. Then realised you were talking about dog walkers.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Small tentative prediction: a doctor's strike will not be supported by the public and if it goes ahead will be a little turning point towards a 'we are all in this together, who do these people think they are' approach to reasonably well paid people in careers with prospects demanding massive amounts more from the taxpayer.
I won’t support it. I’m offered 1.4%. I help train the next generation of pharmacists, surely that deserves pay restoration too?
Public sector pay is at least as much supply and demand rather than who deserves what. Although at the very top end it is who can fleece the most.
I've just come back from ten days in Montenegro. Apart from being marred by various small frustrations like cheating taxi drivers and triple digit temperatures in Podogrica, it was an improbably fascinating trip - a country, like so many in Eastern Europe, apparently split down the middle between following its heart, towards its Slavic brethren Serbia and Russia, and its head, towards NATO and civilised Europe.
As some commenters seem to appreciate my occasional postcards from foreign parts, I thought I'd share some thoughts:
- they use the Euro, and this has clearly trapped them in an unsustainably strong currency. Things feel much more expensive than they should for a developing country at the back end of Europe, unemployment is obviously very high (14% officially, youth unemployment 26%, in reality probably significantly higher) - Russian influence EVERYWHERE. The most common petrol stations were Lukoil, many Russian banks (Sberbank etc) have branches in the towns, lots of signs in tourist areas where in Russian and the usual quota of Russian men obviously drunk by noon on the beaches - but every Montenegrin ministry in the capital flies an EU flag alongside the Montenegrin one, and some fly NATO flags as well. So it's an odd mix. Their national symbol is the double-headed eagle, simultaneously facing west and east, which seems somehow appropriate to the country. - the language situation is just as confused. Montenegrin itself is sort of a dialect of Serbian but sort of its own language. It only formally separated from Serbian in the 1990s. Most of the signs use the Latin script but some are in modified Cyrillic and a few are in English. - the people I talked to are also a mix - they look Mediterranean rather than Slavic, though their language and culture are obviously basically Serbian. They drive better than you'd expect for a country that's next to Albania, and actually stop at pedestrian crossings, which was unexpected - the US embassy in Podgorica is staggeringly ugly and larger than the former embassy in London on Grosvenor Square. For an obscure country of 600k, not a world power of 70m. God knows what Uncle Sam is thinking. - the food is good if uninspired - classic Balkan fare of grilled meat, potatoes, sauces, soups, etc.
Anyway it was a good trip, though unfortunately I had to cut it short because of work. They won't become another Belarus as they are too far - geographically and culturally - from Russia but I will be interested to see if they can maintain their precarious national balancing act over the next couple of decades or if they will embrace the free world with all its problems and disappointments wholeheartedly.
New US embassies are both staggeringly ugly, and away from city centres. They are constructed like alien forts, aimed preventing attacks and demonstrations. To be fair a number of US embassies have been attacked over the years, so not unreasonable, but it doesn't encourage the right mentality in their staff.
Has anyone had a good look at the new London one?
AIUI that is rather better in that respect (eg the "tank traps" are hidden).
A good piece, albeit with a fair amount of architectural bollocks in it *.
* To the north, the site is bordered with an English yew hedge, which leads to meadowland planted with species native to North America (“analogous to the special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom”)
Reminds me of the "god pod", the old EDS HQ in Plano constructed around the time Ross Perot sold the company
Allegedly the original idea was for the building to straddle a 6 lane highway, vetoed on security grounds.
The attractive grasslands (cowherd was an official job title) hide tank traps (or so it was said)
I did visit once. The entrance road leads to employee security gates, with armed guards. If you don't fancy that there is an exit lane to the visitors entrance with more armed guards. If you decline that the exit lane takes you straight back to the freeway going the wrong way so you can't easily return.
The whole campus said GO AWAY
I quite like the US Embassy windy "SECURITY MEASURES NEVER SEEN BEFORE IN LONDON" rhetoric, when a lot of it is just like the concept of the moat at the Tower, and the Ha-Has at Ham House and Syon Park.
Aren’t Ha-Has decorative though rather than defensive or structural - the name itself because it was a sneaky delight in the garden, for very bored people who were delighted by sudden trenches in gardens.
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
Labour should have called the NI shit out on day one and reversed it there and then. That was their first test and they blew it.
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
Labour should have called the NI shit out on day one and reversed it there and then. That was their first test and they blew it.
Which brings us to a problem. Despite promising no increase to NI, IT or VAT Labour got just 33.7% of the vote.
Had they promised to increase taxes pretty sure they would have been sub 30%, at which point they may no longer have won a majority.
The public are quite clear, we want low taxes and high spending.
The contrast between year one of Starmer's government and year one of Blair's is quite telling.
Within the first 12 months Blair had passed many changes that he wanted. Devolution, BoE independence, minimum wage etc etc etc all happened in the first 12 months.
What the hell has Starmer done? Announcements that planning will be changed. Announcements that this, that or the other will happen.
Where are the changes? We could have had a new planning system in place by now.
They are certainly too timid and cautious. I kind of think they are on the right track in some policy areas but that they themselves are uncertain and lack belief in what they need to change, so end up neither going fast enough nor far enough.
Their communications are very poor. Even if they achieve a win they allow it to be sold as a defeat. Some of the " trade deals" could be seen as more of a win than a loss. Deals are a negotiation that encompasses wins and losses. This bunch allow the Tory media to focus on the downs but make no attempt themselves to promote the ups.
They didn't make enough of their legacy. They needed a Liam Byrne note to keep them afloat for a decade. I am sure they found plenty, but being naive and useless sent them all to the dumpster rather than the Guardian.
Yes, they are probably 5/10 for governing and 1/10 for politics and comms.
The contrast between year one of Starmer's government and year one of Blair's is quite telling.
Within the first 12 months Blair had passed many changes that he wanted. Devolution, BoE independence, minimum wage etc etc etc all happened in the first 12 months.
What the hell has Starmer done? Announcements that planning will be changed. Announcements that this, that or the other will happen.
Where are the changes? We could have had a new planning system in place by now.
They are certainly too timid and cautious. I kind of think they are on the right track in some policy areas but that they themselves are uncertain and lack belief in what they need to change, so end up neither going fast enough nor far enough.
Their communications are very poor. Even if they achieve a win they allow it to be sold as a defeat. Some of the " trade deals" could be seen as more of a win than a loss. Deals are a negotiation that encompasses wins and losses. This bunch allow the Tory media to focus on the downs but make no attempt themselves to promote the ups.
They didn't make enough of their legacy. They needed a Liam Byrne note to keep them afloat for a decade. I am sure they found plenty, but being naive and useless sent them all to the dumpster rather than the Guardian.
Yes, they are probably 5/10 for governing and 1/10 for politics and comms.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
A RefCon non-pact is out of Labour's gift.
And do you really believe Labour have strategists?
I've just come back from ten days in Montenegro. Apart from being marred by various small frustrations like cheating taxi drivers and triple digit temperatures in Podogrica, it was an improbably fascinating trip - a country, like so many in Eastern Europe, apparently split down the middle between following its heart, towards its Slavic brethren Serbia and Russia, and its head, towards NATO and civilised Europe.
As some commenters seem to appreciate my occasional postcards from foreign parts, I thought I'd share some thoughts:
- they use the Euro, and this has clearly trapped them in an unsustainably strong currency. Things feel much more expensive than they should for a developing country at the back end of Europe, unemployment is obviously very high (14% officially, youth unemployment 26%, in reality probably significantly higher) - Russian influence EVERYWHERE. The most common petrol stations were Lukoil, many Russian banks (Sberbank etc) have branches in the towns, lots of signs in tourist areas where in Russian and the usual quota of Russian men obviously drunk by noon on the beaches - but every Montenegrin ministry in the capital flies an EU flag alongside the Montenegrin one, and some fly NATO flags as well. So it's an odd mix. Their national symbol is the double-headed eagle, simultaneously facing west and east, which seems somehow appropriate to the country. - the language situation is just as confused. Montenegrin itself is sort of a dialect of Serbian but sort of its own language. It only formally separated from Serbian in the 1990s. Most of the signs use the Latin script but some are in modified Cyrillic and a few are in English. - the people I talked to are also a mix - they look Mediterranean rather than Slavic, though their language and culture are obviously basically Serbian. They drive better than you'd expect for a country that's next to Albania, and actually stop at pedestrian crossings, which was unexpected - the US embassy in Podgorica is staggeringly ugly and larger than the former embassy in London on Grosvenor Square. For an obscure country of 600k, not a world power of 70m. God knows what Uncle Sam is thinking. - the food is good if uninspired - classic Balkan fare of grilled meat, potatoes, sauces, soups, etc.
Anyway it was a good trip, though unfortunately I had to cut it short because of work. They won't become another Belarus as they are too far - geographically and culturally - from Russia but I will be interested to see if they can maintain their precarious national balancing act over the next couple of decades or if they will embrace the free world with all its problems and disappointments wholeheartedly.
New US embassies are both staggeringly ugly, and away from city centres. They are constructed like alien forts, aimed preventing attacks and demonstrations. To be fair a number of US embassies have been attacked over the years, so not unreasonable, but it doesn't encourage the right mentality in their staff.
Has anyone had a good look at the new London one?
AIUI that is rather better in that respect (eg the "tank traps" are hidden).
A good piece, albeit with a fair amount of architectural bollocks in it *.
* To the north, the site is bordered with an English yew hedge, which leads to meadowland planted with species native to North America (“analogous to the special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom”)
Reminds me of the "god pod", the old EDS HQ in Plano constructed around the time Ross Perot sold the company
Allegedly the original idea was for the building to straddle a 6 lane highway, vetoed on security grounds.
The attractive grasslands (cowherd was an official job title) hide tank traps (or so it was said)
I did visit once. The entrance road leads to employee security gates, with armed guards. If you don't fancy that there is an exit lane to the visitors entrance with more armed guards. If you decline that the exit lane takes you straight back to the freeway going the wrong way so you can't easily return.
The whole campus said GO AWAY
I quite like the US Embassy windy "SECURITY MEASURES NEVER SEEN BEFORE IN LONDON" rhetoric, when a lot of it is just like the concept of the moat at the Tower, and the Ha-Has at Ham House and Syon Park.
Aren’t Ha-Has decorative though rather than defensive or structural - the name itself because it was a sneaky delight in the garden, for very bored people who were delighted by sudden trenches in gardens.
Defensive, in the sense that they prevent the sheep from eating the fancy ornamental plants in the formal gardens.
The Ha-Ha at the Royal crescent in Bath keeps the plebs away from the elite
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
Labour should have called the NI shit out on day one and reversed it there and then. That was their first test and they blew it.
Ignoring the fact that the combined tax changes to thresholds and rates were a net tax rise. Over consecutive budgets they froze thresholds and cut rates which netted out as a tax rise overall.
A tax rise that reduced the differential tax rates between earned and unearned incomes.
Far from calling anything out, Labour should do the same thing again. Cut the NI rate (ultimately abolishing it) while extending the freeze on thresholds so unearned incomes get taxed more while salaried incomes are protected.
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
Labour should have called the NI shit out on day one and reversed it there and then. That was their first test and they blew it.
Which brings us to a problem. Despite promising no increase to NI, IT or VAT Labour got just 33.7% of the vote.
Had they promised to increase taxes pretty sure they would have been sub 30%, at which point they may no longer have won a majority.
The public are quite clear, we want low taxes and high spending.
And since Lawson was chancellor, that is mostly what governments have been able to temporarily deliver. Unfortunately, that delivery was mostly by short-term ruses, not brilliant economic management.
The stock of ruses is now empty, and various bills have come due.
Small tentative prediction: a doctor's strike will not be supported by the public and if it goes ahead will be a little turning point towards a 'we are all in this together, who do these people think they are' approach to reasonably well paid people in careers with prospects demanding massive amounts more from the taxpayer.
I was supportive of the last strike but not this one . Many people would like their salaries to have kept up with inflation going back years but doctors asking for another 29% seems both delusional and greedy given the current government finances . And giving into these strikes will open up a Pandora’s box of more problems as other public sector workers will start asking for bigger increases .
A serious question, to which the answer is usually obvious but these days who knows: Is there still a significant surplus of good candidates wanting to get into medical schools? Are all good applicants getting places?
Supply and demand is a factor here. It rather looks as if the people needing 29% are the care workers.
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
Labour should have called the NI shit out on day one and reversed it there and then. That was their first test and they blew it.
Which brings us to a problem. Despite promising no increase to NI, IT or VAT Labour got just 33.7% of the vote.
Had they promised to increase taxes pretty sure they would have been sub 30%, at which point they may no longer have won a majority.
The public are quite clear, we want low taxes and high spending.
And since Lawson was chancellor, that is mostly what governments have been able to temporarily deliver. Unfortunately, that delivery was mostly by short-term ruses, not brilliant economic management.
The stock of ruses is now empty, and various bills have come due.
In recent years parties have mostly given up their role of general political education - 'vote for us because these are our principles and we are reasonably truthful and competent, there are no unicorns and MMT is false' - in favour of delusions. Time for a change in attitude.
Small tentative prediction: a doctor's strike will not be supported by the public and if it goes ahead will be a little turning point towards a 'we are all in this together, who do these people think they are' approach to reasonably well paid people in careers with prospects demanding massive amounts more from the taxpayer.
I was supportive of the last strike but not this one . Many people would like their salaries to have kept up with inflation going back years but doctors asking for another 29% seems both delusional and greedy given the current government finances . And giving into these strikes will open up a Pandora’s box of more problems as other public sector workers will start asking for bigger increases .
A serious question, to which the answer is usually obvious but these days who knows: Is there still a significant surplus of good candidates wanting to get into medical schools? Are all good applicants getting places?
Supply and demand is a factor here. It rather looks as if the people needing 29% are the care workers.
The last government delayed the expansion in the number of doctors we train, not sure if that has been changed by Labour. It is such an obvious and necessary fix, but the benefits would take about eight years to accrue and the shelf life of a modern political career is about five years.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Good morning
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Small tentative prediction: a doctor's strike will not be supported by the public and if it goes ahead will be a little turning point towards a 'we are all in this together, who do these people think they are' approach to reasonably well paid people in careers with prospects demanding massive amounts more from the taxpayer.
I was supportive of the last strike but not this one . Many people would like their salaries to have kept up with inflation going back years but doctors asking for another 29% seems both delusional and greedy given the current government finances . And giving into these strikes will open up a Pandora’s box of more problems as other public sector workers will start asking for bigger increases .
A serious question, to which the answer is usually obvious but these days who knows: Is there still a significant surplus of good candidates wanting to get into medical schools? Are all good applicants getting places?
Supply and demand is a factor here. It rather looks as if the people needing 29% are the care workers.
Care workers deserve a big increase in salary but doctors are now taking the pxss. They’ve had a combined 26% over the last 3 years . Labour have done as much as they can given the finances and should not back down . The doctors might have fared better if they hadn’t put out these ridiculous demands and asked for something more reasonable. Soon they’ll be as popular as estate agents/ solicitors…
And incidentally the public toilet next to that war memorial, which I dutifully used yesterday, has been voted the most beautiful toilet building in the world (which I guess is a relatively low bar?):
Suspicious lack of interior shots. Pieces of atrophied chewing gum jostling the toilet cubes in the pissoir, toilet roll holders that refuse to dispense toilet roll and an overwhelming smell of Rakfisk?
They’re normally concrete and stainless steel, and pretty clean and functional.
The biggest problem they have is dodgy camper van users unloading their chemical toilets into them - the first one I used yesterday in Lofoten was completely blocked and I’d guess that was why. Up here on the tourist trail, the area attracts a fair few numpties, sadly. Not long off the ferry, we were held up waiting to get past a stranded VW camper van, which some bright spark had decided to reverse off the road (or was crap in doing a three pointer) whereupon the rear wheels had sunk into the roadside ditch.
Just like Scotland. What is it about campervanners? They pay £100k for a vehicle and are too mean to pay £10 to empty their shit cassette in an official facility. I wonder whether, when they are at home, do they shit in a chamber pot and throw the contents over next door’s garden? Rant over.
That's exactly the same mentality as doggers tying their pooh-bags onto trees rather than take them to the nearest pooh bin, or the mounds of litter found next to every motorway or layby in the country.
I’m now worrying about why people who go dogging would need poo bags.
And incidentally the public toilet next to that war memorial, which I dutifully used yesterday, has been voted the most beautiful toilet building in the world (which I guess is a relatively low bar?):
Suspicious lack of interior shots. Pieces of atrophied chewing gum jostling the toilet cubes in the pissoir, toilet roll holders that refuse to dispense toilet roll and an overwhelming smell of Rakfisk?
They’re normally concrete and stainless steel, and pretty clean and functional.
The biggest problem they have is dodgy camper van users unloading their chemical toilets into them - the first one I used yesterday in Lofoten was completely blocked and I’d guess that was why. Up here on the tourist trail, the area attracts a fair few numpties, sadly. Not long off the ferry, we were held up waiting to get past a stranded VW camper van, which some bright spark had decided to reverse off the road (or was crap in doing a three pointer) whereupon the rear wheels had sunk into the roadside ditch.
Just like Scotland. What is it about campervanners? They pay £100k for a vehicle and are too mean to pay £10 to empty their shit cassette in an official facility. I wonder whether, when they are at home, do they shit in a chamber pot and throw the contents over next door’s garden? Rant over.
That's exactly the same mentality as doggers tying their pooh-bags onto trees rather than take them to the nearest pooh bin, or the mounds of litter found next to every motorway or layby in the country.
I’m now worrying about why people who go dogging would need poo bags.
Because if they don’t use them, we see them and then they’re buggered?
And incidentally the public toilet next to that war memorial, which I dutifully used yesterday, has been voted the most beautiful toilet building in the world (which I guess is a relatively low bar?):
Suspicious lack of interior shots. Pieces of atrophied chewing gum jostling the toilet cubes in the pissoir, toilet roll holders that refuse to dispense toilet roll and an overwhelming smell of Rakfisk?
They’re normally concrete and stainless steel, and pretty clean and functional.
The biggest problem they have is dodgy camper van users unloading their chemical toilets into them - the first one I used yesterday in Lofoten was completely blocked and I’d guess that was why. Up here on the tourist trail, the area attracts a fair few numpties, sadly. Not long off the ferry, we were held up waiting to get past a stranded VW camper van, which some bright spark had decided to reverse off the road (or was crap in doing a three pointer) whereupon the rear wheels had sunk into the roadside ditch.
Just like Scotland. What is it about campervanners? They pay £100k for a vehicle and are too mean to pay £10 to empty their shit cassette in an official facility. I wonder whether, when they are at home, do they shit in a chamber pot and throw the contents over next door’s garden? Rant over.
That's exactly the same mentality as doggers tying their pooh-bags onto trees rather than take them to the nearest pooh bin, or the mounds of litter found next to every motorway or layby in the country.
I’m now worrying about why people who go dogging would need poo bags.
On behalf of Eyeore and Piglet..... what is a pooh bag? Thought that, if he encased in anything, it was a honey jar!
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
A RefCon non-pact is out of Labour's gift.
And do you really believe Labour have strategists?
Yes this is not in their gift. But strategies to divide and rule are not impossible. Political parties are Aesop's scorpions by nature, and Labour's job is to keep both Tory and Reform averse to each other as a well executed Ref/Con pact would diminish Labour's chances to a gigantic extent.
Yes, they have psephological strategists. At the last election their tactics worked well. It's political strategists, narrative creation and common sense they seem short of.
And incidentally the public toilet next to that war memorial, which I dutifully used yesterday, has been voted the most beautiful toilet building in the world (which I guess is a relatively low bar?):
Suspicious lack of interior shots. Pieces of atrophied chewing gum jostling the toilet cubes in the pissoir, toilet roll holders that refuse to dispense toilet roll and an overwhelming smell of Rakfisk?
They’re normally concrete and stainless steel, and pretty clean and functional.
The biggest problem they have is dodgy camper van users unloading their chemical toilets into them - the first one I used yesterday in Lofoten was completely blocked and I’d guess that was why. Up here on the tourist trail, the area attracts a fair few numpties, sadly. Not long off the ferry, we were held up waiting to get past a stranded VW camper van, which some bright spark had decided to reverse off the road (or was crap in doing a three pointer) whereupon the rear wheels had sunk into the roadside ditch.
Just like Scotland. What is it about campervanners? They pay £100k for a vehicle and are too mean to pay £10 to empty their shit cassette in an official facility. I wonder whether, when they are at home, do they shit in a chamber pot and throw the contents over next door’s garden? Rant over.
That's exactly the same mentality as doggers tying their pooh-bags onto trees rather than take them to the nearest pooh bin, or the mounds of litter found next to every motorway or layby in the country.
I’m now worrying about why people who go dogging would need poo bags.
On behalf of Eyeore and Piglet..... what is a pooh bag? Thought that, if he encased in anything, it was a honey jar!
Anyhow, here’s a tiny bit of WW2 history I came across yesterday, which I doubt anyone here knows; I certainly didn’t. A memorial to the 42 dead of Operation Seagull - SOE commandos and the crew of a Norwegian submarine - which had it succeeded, might by now have been depicted in film (at least one of the guys was a veteran from the well-known sabotage raid on the Norwegian heavy water plant).
Sadly the submarine set off on its mission - taking the commandos to destroy the power plant of a mining operation near the Swedish border - but simply disappeared. In 1985 they found it at the bottom of the ocean, the wreckage indicating that it had hit a German mine. The British had advised the Norwegians before the mission of the route, believed to be clear of mines, but this minefield had been very recently laid. Norway’s King unveiled the memorial, on the shore nearest the site of the wreckage, in 1987. D4S as usual.
Not an operation I had heard of, but it's interesting that it was quite late in the war - 1943.
I have not even seen that mentioned in histories about SOE.
Although badged as SOE (from whence co-ordination/organisation and intelligence came) I believe they were all Norwegians (perhaps some trained and sent back from the UK?) - Linge company - which got quite a reputation for sabotage operations during the war. Altogether the company lost nearly 60 men during the war, so that submarine accounted for more than half their total wartime casualties.
A while back I met the Norwegian second wife of Colin Gubbins, the head of SOE, the story being that they met during various WWII SOE shenanigans. She was a formidable woman. I believe quite a large part of the SOE remit was setting up operations by foreign troops, Anthropoid probably the most famous example.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
A RefCon non-pact is out of Labour's gift.
And do you really believe Labour have strategists?
Yes this is not in their gift. But strategies to divide and rule are not impossible. Political parties are Aesop's scorpions by nature, and Labour's job is to keep both Tory and Reform averse to each other as a well executed Ref/Con pact would diminish Labour's chances to a gigantic extent.
Yes, they have psephological strategists. At the last election their tactics worked well. It's political strategists, narrative creation and common sense they seem short of.
A friend of mine, a very keen Labour supporter was, at the last election, urging his Tory fiends to vote Reform in the hope of seeing the Labour candidate squeeze past Priti Patel. Meanwhile, after much thought. I voted Labour rather than LibDem for the same reason. I have to say the LibDems didn't seem to be really trying in Witham; probably concentrating efforts on Chelmsford (successfully) and Colchester, a former LibDem seat (unsuccessfully).
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
A RefCon non-pact is out of Labour's gift.
And do you really believe Labour have strategists?
Yes this is not in their gift. But strategies to divide and rule are not impossible. Political parties are Aesop's scorpions by nature, and Labour's job is to keep both Tory and Reform averse to each other as a well executed Ref/Con pact would diminish Labour's chances to a gigantic extent.
Yes, they have psephological strategists. At the last election their tactics worked well. It's political strategists, narrative creation and common sense they seem short of.
Thatcher and Blair didn’t need to divide the opposition. They had policies and visions that marginalised the opposition.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Good morning
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Why ?
Why my sad thought? Because you can govern well and lose; and you can govern not well and win. Getting the psephology right matters.
I am of course assuming that to politicians (not the rest of us) retaining power is number one objective. Sad thought. Perhaps too sad?
The boss of Yorkshire Water received a bonus of £371,000 on top of her base salary of £585,000 last year
The water companies have made a killing, but done so under an EU legal framework that de facto banned new water infrastructure. We still have that today. Droughts in the summer and floods in the winter are policy.
If water companies are banned from new infrastructure what the fuck have Wessex Water been doing for 9 months in the middle of Warminster.
Why do I suspect your interpretation of the facts is somewhat suspect?
Tbf, I have been asking myself that question every time I drive through Hagley in Worcestershire where whatever the gas pipe company is called this week has just dug up the road for the seventh time in the last two and a half years.
My favourite is when a Welsh council resurfaces an A road for the first time in 25 years and no sooner has the last road roller left, Dwr Cymru send in their contractors to dig a five mile trench along the new surface. They leave and Openreach put in fibre cables between two villages. Not to miss out National Grid and British Gas take their turn.
That's a core issue.
Gutted Councils do not have adequate resource to regulate adequately.
There are a number of things that need to be back in house, starting with Building Inspectors.
And incidentally the public toilet next to that war memorial, which I dutifully used yesterday, has been voted the most beautiful toilet building in the world (which I guess is a relatively low bar?):
Suspicious lack of interior shots. Pieces of atrophied chewing gum jostling the toilet cubes in the pissoir, toilet roll holders that refuse to dispense toilet roll and an overwhelming smell of Rakfisk?
They’re normally concrete and stainless steel, and pretty clean and functional.
The biggest problem they have is dodgy camper van users unloading their chemical toilets into them - the first one I used yesterday in Lofoten was completely blocked and I’d guess that was why. Up here on the tourist trail, the area attracts a fair few numpties, sadly. Not long off the ferry, we were held up waiting to get past a stranded VW camper van, which some bright spark had decided to reverse off the road (or was crap in doing a three pointer) whereupon the rear wheels had sunk into the roadside ditch.
Just like Scotland. What is it about campervanners? They pay £100k for a vehicle and are too mean to pay £10 to empty their shit cassette in an official facility. I wonder whether, when they are at home, do they shit in a chamber pot and throw the contents over next door’s garden? Rant over.
That's exactly the same mentality as doggers tying their pooh-bags onto trees rather than take them to the nearest pooh bin, or the mounds of litter found next to every motorway or layby in the country.
I’m now worrying about why people who go dogging would need poo bags.
On behalf of Eyeore and Piglet..... what is a pooh bag? Thought that, if he encased in anything, it was a honey jar!
It's a silent H !
This area is full of 'omeless aitches that never get pronounced, so I 'ave to find 'ousing for the refugees.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Good morning
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Why ?
Why my sad thought? Because you can govern well and lose; and you can govern not well and win. Getting the psephology right matters.
I am of course assuming that to politicians (not the rest of us) retaining power is number one objective. Sad thought. Perhaps too sad?
Not just politicians. The NU10K. Middle managers. Senior civil servants.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Good morning
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Why ?
Why my sad thought? Because you can govern well and lose; and you can govern not well and win. Getting the psephology right matters.
I am of course assuming that to politicians (not the rest of us) retaining power is number one objective. Sad thought. Perhaps too sad?
It just seems strange that you are suggesting even if Labour do not govern especially well, you think it is more important they win the next election then govern in the country's best interests
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
A RefCon non-pact is out of Labour's gift.
And do you really believe Labour have strategists?
Yes this is not in their gift. But strategies to divide and rule are not impossible. Political parties are Aesop's scorpions by nature, and Labour's job is to keep both Tory and Reform averse to each other as a well executed Ref/Con pact would diminish Labour's chances to a gigantic extent.
Yes, they have psephological strategists. At the last election their tactics worked well. It's political strategists, narrative creation and common sense they seem short of.
Thatcher and Blair didn’t need to divide the opposition. They had policies and visions that marginalised the opposition.
I don't that option is currently available. This line has been discontinued.
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
Labour should have called the NI shit out on day one and reversed it there and then. That was their first test and they blew it.
Which brings us to a problem. Despite promising no increase to NI, IT or VAT Labour got just 33.7% of the vote.
Had they promised to increase taxes pretty sure they would have been sub 30%, at which point they may no longer have won a majority.
The public are quite clear, we want low taxes and high spending.
So someone needs to sit them down and explain what happens when the money runs out.
The issue I have is that no Government has given thought as to how the magic productivity fairy can be called into existence - because that seems to be what they are seeking.
And the reality is that the magic fairy doesn't exist - you need to invest in infrastructure or technology to increase productivity and both cost money.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Good morning
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Why ?
Why my sad thought? Because you can govern well and lose; and you can govern not well and win. Getting the psephology right matters.
I am of course assuming that to politicians (not the rest of us) retaining power is number one objective. Sad thought. Perhaps too sad?
It just seems strange that you are suggesting even if Labour do not govern especially well, you think it is more important they win the next election then govern in the country's best interests
I expressed myself sub optimally, and did not mean that. For we, we need excellent government, even if it leads to unpopularity. Point noted.
The boss of Yorkshire Water received a bonus of £371,000 on top of her base salary of £585,000 last year
The water companies have made a killing, but done so under an EU legal framework that de facto banned new water infrastructure. We still have that today. Droughts in the summer and floods in the winter are policy.
Ha, ha, ha. Nothing to do with shocking oversight by incompetent government since privatisation. You can toss fourteen years of Labour Governments into that pot. But I will allow you to give Johnson a free pass because he's gorgeous and Truss a free pass because she was only PM for five minutes.
Governments have acquiesced, civil servants and agencies have gold-plated legislation, and water companies have taken advantage of the law to avoid doing their job, but the regulations are there in the EU's waterways directives, and I've given chapter and verse on this before. Malmesbury, who I believe has some experience in these matters, will tell you the implacable opposition to anything that looks like a reservoir, even filling up old quarries and turning them into meres. That isn't lazy water companies, or particularly incompetent Governments.
You just can't hear anything against the EU, and you cling to the naive idea, utterly exploded by Sir Useless and his pisspoor Government every single day, that if only nice centrist technocrats can all get together and professionally sort things out without any noisy interference from the Daily Mail reading classes, the world would be a wonderful and efficient place. Actually such people are the biggest wreckers and responsible for almost all the major ills that beset our country.
Small tentative prediction: a doctor's strike will not be supported by the public and if it goes ahead will be a little turning point towards a 'we are all in this together, who do these people think they are' approach to reasonably well paid people in careers with prospects demanding massive amounts more from the taxpayer.
I was supportive of the last strike but not this one . Many people would like their salaries to have kept up with inflation going back years but doctors asking for another 29% seems both delusional and greedy given the current government finances . And giving into these strikes will open up a Pandora’s box of more problems as other public sector workers will start asking for bigger increases .
It's a stupid time to strike.
Because the answer to we are striking for more money is you got 22% last year (I know it wasn't structured like that but facts don't matter). At which point the Doctors start looking greedy rather than unlucky.
Now if they were striking because of the new role allocation system I would accept that totally...
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
Labour should have called the NI shit out on day one and reversed it there and then. That was their first test and they blew it.
Which brings us to a problem. Despite promising no increase to NI, IT or VAT Labour got just 33.7% of the vote.
Had they promised to increase taxes pretty sure they would have been sub 30%, at which point they may no longer have won a majority.
The public are quite clear, we want low taxes and high spending.
So someone needs to sit them down and explain what happens when the money runs out.
The issue I have is that no Government has given thought as to how the magic productivity fairy can be called into existence - because that seems to be what they are seeking.
And the reality is that the magic fairy doesn't exist - you need to invest in infrastructure or technology to increase productivity and both cost money.
I see Reeves is to review pension contributions with a suggestion employers pay an additional 3%
I've just come back from ten days in Montenegro. Apart from being marred by various small frustrations like cheating taxi drivers and triple digit temperatures in Podogrica, it was an improbably fascinating trip - a country, like so many in Eastern Europe, apparently split down the middle between following its heart, towards its Slavic brethren Serbia and Russia, and its head, towards NATO and civilised Europe.
As some commenters seem to appreciate my occasional postcards from foreign parts, I thought I'd share some thoughts:
- they use the Euro, and this has clearly trapped them in an unsustainably strong currency. Things feel much more expensive than they should for a developing country at the back end of Europe, unemployment is obviously very high (14% officially, youth unemployment 26%, in reality probably significantly higher) - Russian influence EVERYWHERE. The most common petrol stations were Lukoil, many Russian banks (Sberbank etc) have branches in the towns, lots of signs in tourist areas where in Russian and the usual quota of Russian men obviously drunk by noon on the beaches - but every Montenegrin ministry in the capital flies an EU flag alongside the Montenegrin one, and some fly NATO flags as well. So it's an odd mix. Their national symbol is the double-headed eagle, simultaneously facing west and east, which seems somehow appropriate to the country. - the language situation is just as confused. Montenegrin itself is sort of a dialect of Serbian but sort of its own language. It only formally separated from Serbian in the 1990s. Most of the signs use the Latin script but some are in modified Cyrillic and a few are in English. - the people I talked to are also a mix - they look Mediterranean rather than Slavic, though their language and culture are obviously basically Serbian. They drive better than you'd expect for a country that's next to Albania, and actually stop at pedestrian crossings, which was unexpected - the US embassy in Podgorica is staggeringly ugly and larger than the former embassy in London on Grosvenor Square. For an obscure country of 600k, not a world power of 70m. God knows what Uncle Sam is thinking. - the food is good if uninspired - classic Balkan fare of grilled meat, potatoes, sauces, soups, etc.
Anyway it was a good trip, though unfortunately I had to cut it short because of work. They won't become another Belarus as they are too far - geographically and culturally - from Russia but I will be interested to see if they can maintain their precarious national balancing act over the next couple of decades or if they will embrace the free world with all its problems and disappointments wholeheartedly.
New US embassies are both staggeringly ugly, and away from city centres. They are constructed like alien forts, aimed preventing attacks and demonstrations. To be fair a number of US embassies have been attacked over the years, so not unreasonable, but it doesn't encourage the right mentality in their staff.
Has anyone had a good look at the new London one?
AIUI that is rather better in that respect (eg the "tank traps" are hidden).
A good piece, albeit with a fair amount of architectural bollocks in it *.
* To the north, the site is bordered with an English yew hedge, which leads to meadowland planted with species native to North America (“analogous to the special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom”)
Reminds me of the "god pod", the old EDS HQ in Plano constructed around the time Ross Perot sold the company
Allegedly the original idea was for the building to straddle a 6 lane highway, vetoed on security grounds.
The attractive grasslands (cowherd was an official job title) hide tank traps (or so it was said)
I did visit once. The entrance road leads to employee security gates, with armed guards. If you don't fancy that there is an exit lane to the visitors entrance with more armed guards. If you decline that the exit lane takes you straight back to the freeway going the wrong way so you can't easily return.
The whole campus said GO AWAY
I quite like the US Embassy windy "SECURITY MEASURES NEVER SEEN BEFORE IN LONDON" rhetoric, when a lot of it is just like the concept of the moat at the Tower, and the Ha-Has at Ham House and Syon Park.
Aren’t Ha-Has decorative though rather than defensive or structural - the name itself because it was a sneaky delight in the garden, for very bored people who were delighted by sudden trenches in gardens.
They are dual purpose - preserve the view whilst keeping livestock out, and possibly help with drainage as well. Effectively they are a sunken wall.
There are often fences at horse trials called "the sunken wall", which is a Mini Ha-Ha. When I used to watch Badminton Horse Trials, they always had a sunken wall fence.
On the BBC Jonathan Agnew reports that's already been an attempt to change the ball. What on earth is the matter, either with the ball or with the bowlers?
On the BBC Jonathan Agnew reports that's already been an attempt to change the ball. What on earth is the matter, either with the ball or with the bowlers?
Overheating?
Not sure if it is the ball, players, or umpires !!!!!
On the BBC Jonathan Agnew reports that's already been an attempt to change the ball. What on earth is the matter, either with the ball or with the bowlers?
I think it's called cheating when things aren't quite going your way..😚
At what point does anti Reform tactical voting enter the fray ?
Election time?
May 26 or the next GE ?
GE. If the Refukers get some more accountability for local government ahead of the next election that is a good thing.
Firstly and genuinely they deserve some more power for their vote share including at the GE. Secondly it will give the public something to go on beyond rhetoric. Thirdly it might make their own politicians think about how to do stuff, rather than just be the best at moaning.
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
Labour should have called the NI shit out on day one and reversed it there and then. That was their first test and they blew it.
Which brings us to a problem. Despite promising no increase to NI, IT or VAT Labour got just 33.7% of the vote.
Had they promised to increase taxes pretty sure they would have been sub 30%, at which point they may no longer have won a majority.
The public are quite clear, we want low taxes and high spending.
So someone needs to sit them down and explain what happens when the money runs out.
The issue I have is that no Government has given thought as to how the magic productivity fairy can be called into existence - because that seems to be what they are seeking.
And the reality is that the magic fairy doesn't exist - you need to invest in infrastructure or technology to increase productivity and both cost money.
I don't think your logic is necessarily watertight. Spending a lot of Government money on infrastructure projects (or heaven forefend, technology projects) may not be the best way to enhance productivity. Essentially, both take resources that would otherwise be allocated by the market, and spend them, perhaps in unproductive ways, on projects that may not lead purely to productivity gains, because they may at least in part be designed with political or social goals in mind.
There are some infrastructure projects that need Government support these days, but the best way forward to me is to reduce taxation on businesses and allow them to grow. As they grow, their infrastructure requirements will become apparent, and Government can support.
At what point does anti Reform tactical voting enter the fray ?
It will be a huge issue in the next election. There will be a major battle in hundreds of seats as to what is the right anti-Reform vote.
That's right, up to a point. But if you end up voting for someone you don't much like, you'll spend the following 5 years grumbling about it, which ultimately (extrapolating to the general population) is bad for democracy, and leads to parties like Reform. There needs to be an element of voting for whom you like, regardless of how you think other people will vote.
I think one should first decide if one clearly prefers a party, and if so vote for it. If one doesn't have much preference between two or three, and dislikes another option, than vote tactically.
Small tentative prediction: a doctor's strike will not be supported by the public and if it goes ahead will be a little turning point towards a 'we are all in this together, who do these people think they are' approach to reasonably well paid people in careers with prospects demanding massive amounts more from the taxpayer.
I was supportive of the last strike but not this one . Many people would like their salaries to have kept up with inflation going back years but doctors asking for another 29% seems both delusional and greedy given the current government finances . And giving into these strikes will open up a Pandora’s box of more problems as other public sector workers will start asking for bigger increases .
It's a stupid time to strike.
Because the answer to we are striking for more money is you got 22% last year (I know it wasn't structured like that but facts don't matter). At which point the Doctors start looking greedy rather than unlucky.
Now if they were striking because of the new role allocation system I would accept that totally...
What was stupid was to give into the first one and think they wouldn't come back for more.
Again, Labour coming in thinking 'We're the nice Government - we will succeed because like-minded people will do everything we want.'
At what point does anti Reform tactical voting enter the fray ?
It will be a huge issue in the next election. There will be a major battle in hundreds of seats as to what is the right anti-Reform vote.
That's right, up to a point. But if you end up voting for someone you don't much like, you'll spend the following 5 years grumbling about it, which ultimately (extrapolating to the general population) is bad for democracy, and leads to parties like Reform. There needs to be an element of voting for whom you like, regardless of how you think other people will vote.
I think one should first decide if one clearly prefers a party, and if so vote for it. If one doesn't have much preference between two or three, and dislikes another option, than vote tactically.
At what point does anti Reform tactical voting enter the fray ?
It will be a huge issue in the next election. There will be a major battle in hundreds of seats as to what is the right anti-Reform vote.
That's right, up to a point. But if you end up voting for someone you don't much like, you'll spend the following 5 years grumbling about it, which ultimately (extrapolating to the general population) is bad for democracy, and leads to parties like Reform. There needs to be an element of voting for whom you like, regardless of how you think other people will vote.
I think one should first decide if one clearly prefers a party, and if so vote for it. If one doesn't have much preference between two or three, and dislikes another option, than vote tactically.
It is a long time since I had positive views of any party unfortunately! Paddies LDs perhaps.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Good morning
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Why ?
While I agree with the underlying point, it's relevant that (my impression) you won't vote Labour regardless of whether they govern well or not. Doesn't that mean that only the most idealistic of Ministers should take account of your views, rather than someone who might be swayed?
At what point does anti Reform tactical voting enter the fray ?
It will be a huge issue in the next election. There will be a major battle in hundreds of seats as to what is the right anti-Reform vote.
That's right, up to a point. But if you end up voting for someone you don't much like, you'll spend the following 5 years grumbling about it, which ultimately (extrapolating to the general population) is bad for democracy, and leads to parties like Reform. There needs to be an element of voting for whom you like, regardless of how you think other people will vote.
I think one should first decide if one clearly prefers a party, and if so vote for it. If one doesn't have much preference between two or three, and dislikes another option, than vote tactically.
It is a long time since I had positive views of any party unfortunately! Paddies LDs perhaps.
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
At what point does anti Reform tactical voting enter the fray ?
It will be a huge issue in the next election. There will be a major battle in hundreds of seats as to what is the right anti-Reform vote.
Mmm, not sure. I don't see it being a major factor. Usually you get a lot of tactical voting in university constituencies but those aren't going to be Reform-friendly seats anyway.
It will be interesting how Streeting manages the BMA/Resident Doctors. I get the strong impression that there's virtually unanimous public and political opposition to their strike threat, which is fairly unusual. Even rabid lefties like me are a bit pissed off with the doctors. If there were any money to splash around (which there isn't) then we'd much rather it went to care workers or similar.
I'm rather hoping that the doctors have overplayed their hand, and those who didn't vote in the recent ballot will be regretting it. The actual majority in favour as a proportion of all RDs was pretty small, and I suspect/hope the BMA will face a gradual backlash and a desire for the doctors to moderate their demands significantly.
At what point does anti Reform tactical voting enter the fray ?
It will be a huge issue in the next election. There will be a major battle in hundreds of seats as to what is the right anti-Reform vote.
That's right, up to a point. But if you end up voting for someone you don't much like, you'll spend the following 5 years grumbling about it, which ultimately (extrapolating to the general population) is bad for democracy, and leads to parties like Reform. There needs to be an element of voting for whom you like, regardless of how you think other people will vote.
I think one should first decide if one clearly prefers a party, and if so vote for it. If one doesn't have much preference between two or three, and dislikes another option, than vote tactically.
It is a long time since I had positive views of any party unfortunately! Paddies LDs perhaps.
Charlie Kennedy's LD's as well.
Never really got in tune with his leadership for some reason. Even with Ashdown looking back it was probably my relative naivete of youth combined with winning plenty at 33/1 on their seats overs in 97......
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
Labour should have called the NI shit out on day one and reversed it there and then. That was their first test and they blew it.
Ignoring the fact that the combined tax changes to thresholds and rates were a net tax rise. Over consecutive budgets they froze thresholds and cut rates which netted out as a tax rise overall.
A tax rise that reduced the differential tax rates between earned and unearned incomes.
Far from calling anything out, Labour should do the same thing again. Cut the NI rate (ultimately abolishing it) while extending the freeze on thresholds so unearned incomes get taxed more while salaried incomes are protected.
No NI should be ringfenced for the state pension and JSA based on what it was intended to fund
I may be in a minority of one on here but I think Kemi Badenoch is growing into the role a little and her poor start has been replaced by a more competent performance of late.
Unfortunately, the inepititude and incompetence of the last Conservative Government is as several millstones round her neck and as Thursday's by-election results showed, the challenge of Reform has left her party looking out of touch, out of date and out of time with such activists as remain demoralised. Look at the numbers from Woking and Wealden - two areas which were strongly Conservative not too long ago.
She is further hampered by having been part of the problem and it's hard when you've been part of the problem to be part of the solution. It took the election of David Cameron for the Conservative Party to escape the shadow of what had gone before.
As others have said, there's a space for a party to be honest with the electorate about the public finances but that honesty has to start with a substantial mea culpa regarding how we got into this mess and that includes the Covid response from Sunak and Hunt's pre-election NI cuts. Acknowledging you got things wrong is the first stage toward getting things right but Stride has to explain, if we are to balance the books, how this will happen, what will be cut, which taxes will be raised, the future of the Triple Lock, commitments on defence expenditure etc and that will involve saying a lot of things people don't want to hear now.
Hunt’s NI cuts were the most egregious piece of governmental electioneering since ... the previous piece of governmental electioneering.
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
Labour should have called the NI shit out on day one and reversed it there and then. That was their first test and they blew it.
Ignoring the fact that the combined tax changes to thresholds and rates were a net tax rise. Over consecutive budgets they froze thresholds and cut rates which netted out as a tax rise overall.
A tax rise that reduced the differential tax rates between earned and unearned incomes.
Far from calling anything out, Labour should do the same thing again. Cut the NI rate (ultimately abolishing it) while extending the freeze on thresholds so unearned incomes get taxed more while salaried incomes are protected.
I forgot you are a big fan of regressive taxation.
Replace all NI as income tax and charge it at the combined rate to all taxpayers.
Am now in a 3-way mix between spending time in our house in France, visiting places with the children that I know they will enjoy, before they’re too old (Paris next month, Morocco in October), doing bits of tourism on the back of work trips, and going on random jaunts with my country-collecting friend. The Balkan’s, as a driving trip, is on the visit with children list.
My friend has mooted Cote D’Ivoire in January (he tends to co-opt me for the Francophone countries). Anyone been?
My son-in-law is our incoming ambassador to Morocco, so we'll be spending Christmas and New Year there. Tips on things to see welcome!
In general I think owning a holiday place is a two-edged sword - nice to rely on it, but as you've found it tends to pull one back to revisiting the same place.
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
Do you believe if you write Mel Stride on here enough times he becomes LOTO?
It will be interesting how Streeting manages the BMA/Resident Doctors. I get the strong impression that there's virtually unanimous public and political opposition to their strike threat, which is fairly unusual. Even rabid lefties like me are a bit pissed off with the doctors. If there were any money to splash around (which there isn't) then we'd much rather it went to care workers or similar.
I'm rather hoping that the doctors have overplayed their hand, and those who didn't vote in the recent ballot will be regretting it. The actual majority in favour as a proportion of all RDs was pretty small, and I suspect/hope the BMA will face a gradual backlash and a desire for the doctors to moderate their demands significantly.
It's very interesting that the last doctors' strike was, I believe, the first ever, and the next one is their first bargaining position.
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
Do you believe if you write Mel Stride on here enough times he becomes LOTO?
If it's not Jenrick I'm a Dutchman.
There are surely more Dutch Petes than Mexican Petes?
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Good morning
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Why ?
While I agree with the underlying point, it's relevant that (my impression) you won't vote Labour regardless of whether they govern well or not. Doesn't that mean that only the most idealistic of Ministers should take account of your views, rather than someone who might be swayed?
Good morning Nick
I did vote for Blair twice so I have voted Labour previously, but having experienced Labour here in Wales for decades they need to lose the Senedd
I really hoped Starmer would restore responsible government but he and Reeves have simply failed to the point they have lost the public and allowed the rise of Reform
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
A RefCon non-pact is out of Labour's gift.
And do you really believe Labour have strategists?
Yes this is not in their gift. But strategies to divide and rule are not impossible. Political parties are Aesop's scorpions by nature, and Labour's job is to keep both Tory and Reform averse to each other as a well executed Ref/Con pact would diminish Labour's chances to a gigantic extent.
Yes, they have psephological strategists. At the last election their tactics worked well. It's political strategists, narrative creation and common sense they seem short of.
A friend of mine, a very keen Labour supporter was, at the last election, urging his Tory fiends to vote Reform in the hope of seeing the Labour candidate squeeze past Priti Patel. Meanwhile, after much thought. I voted Labour rather than LibDem for the same reason. I have to say the LibDems didn't seem to be really trying in Witham; probably concentrating efforts on Chelmsford (successfully) and Colchester, a former LibDem seat (unsuccessfully).
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
Do you believe if you write Mel Stride on here enough times he becomes LOTO?
If it's not Jenrick I'm a Dutchman.
If it goes to the membership, I'm pretty sure they pick Jenrick over Stride. So Stride only gets it as a coronation.
Are the Conservative membership really in the mood to accept that?
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
What's behind this odd pushing from you of the silly bloater? If course Reform has outflanked the Tories on the right. But the Lib Dems, Labour and the Nationalist Parties are clearly occupying the 'centre-left' that you seem to wish to indulge, and such voters are even less likely to vote for the Tories (though they do seem very happy to offer free advice).
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
Do you believe if you write Mel Stride on here enough times he becomes LOTO?
Small tentative prediction: a doctor's strike will not be supported by the public and if it goes ahead will be a little turning point towards a 'we are all in this together, who do these people think they are' approach to reasonably well paid people in careers with prospects demanding massive amounts more from the taxpayer.
I was supportive of the last strike but not this one . Many people would like their salaries to have kept up with inflation going back years but doctors asking for another 29% seems both delusional and greedy given the current government finances . And giving into these strikes will open up a Pandora’s box of more problems as other public sector workers will start asking for bigger increases .
A serious question, to which the answer is usually obvious but these days who knows: Is there still a significant surplus of good candidates wanting to get into medical schools? Are all good applicants getting places?
Supply and demand is a factor here. It rather looks as if the people needing 29% are the care workers.
The last government delayed the expansion in the number of doctors we train, not sure if that has been changed by Labour. It is such an obvious and necessary fix, but the benefits would take about eight years to accrue and the shelf life of a modern political career is about five years.
Yes, there is no expansion of number of medical students at my medical school. Just as well as there was no provision for increased facilities or training time for experienced medical educators like myself in the initial announcement.
The real obstacle to more doctors isn't so much the number of undergraduates as the number of postgraduate training places and the quality of training in them. I suspect that an expansion of these would do more for the NHS and for settling the forthcoming strikes than a pay rise. The discontent amongst the juniors is more about career progression and rotations than pay as far as I can tell.
I am not in the BMA so didn't vote in this ballot, but note that the turnout was way down. I think the Strikes will have few participants and fizzle out this time around. I don't get the same sense of grievance as when the pay rise was so far behind inflation 2 years ago.
Am now in a 3-way mix between spending time in our house in France, visiting places with the children that I know they will enjoy, before they’re too old (Paris next month, Morocco in October), doing bits of tourism on the back of work trips, and going on random jaunts with my country-collecting friend. The Balkan’s, as a driving trip, is on the visit with children list.
My friend has mooted Cote D’Ivoire in January (he tends to co-opt me for the Francophone countries). Anyone been?
My son-in-law is our incoming ambassador to Morocco, so we'll be spending Christmas and New Year there. Tips on things to see welcome!
In general I think owning a holiday place is a two-edged sword - nice to rely on it, but as you've found it tends to pull one back to revisiting the same place.
The truly wonderful Andi Oliver did a foodie show in Morocco, may be a help
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
A RefCon non-pact is out of Labour's gift.
And do you really believe Labour have strategists?
Yes this is not in their gift. But strategies to divide and rule are not impossible. Political parties are Aesop's scorpions by nature, and Labour's job is to keep both Tory and Reform averse to each other as a well executed Ref/Con pact would diminish Labour's chances to a gigantic extent.
Yes, they have psephological strategists. At the last election their tactics worked well. It's political strategists, narrative creation and common sense they seem short of.
A friend of mine, a very keen Labour supporter was, at the last election, urging his Tory fiends to vote Reform in the hope of seeing the Labour candidate squeeze past Priti Patel. Meanwhile, after much thought. I voted Labour rather than LibDem for the same reason. I have to say the LibDems didn't seem to be really trying in Witham; probably concentrating efforts on Chelmsford (successfully) and Colchester, a former LibDem seat (unsuccessfully).
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
MPs are not going to go through all of the trauma and negative publicity of knifing Badenoch just to replace her with a bland centrist . If things are bad enough for a coup they’ll roll the dice.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Good morning
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Why ?
While I agree with the underlying point, it's relevant that (my impression) you won't vote Labour regardless of whether they govern well or not. Doesn't that mean that only the most idealistic of Ministers should take account of your views, rather than someone who might be swayed?
Good morning Nick
I did vote for Blair twice so I have voted Labour previously, but having experienced Labour here in Wales for decades they need to lose the Senedd
I really hoped Starmer would restore responsible government but he and Reeves have simply failed to the point they have lost the public and allowed the rise of Reform
My big hope,when I voted Labour, rather than not vote, was they got fiscal responsibility.
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Good morning
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Why ?
Why my sad thought? Because you can govern well and lose; and you can govern not well and win. Getting the psephology right matters.
I am of course assuming that to politicians (not the rest of us) retaining power is number one objective. Sad thought. Perhaps too sad?
It just seems strange that you are suggesting even if Labour do not govern especially well, you think it is more important they win the next election then govern in the country's best interests
I thought his comment was fairly clearly predicated on how Labour might win the election without governing well ?
I don't think @algarkirk was actually endorsing that.
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
Do you believe if you write Mel Stride on here enough times he becomes LOTO?
If it's not Jenrick I'm a Dutchman.
There are surely more Dutch Petes than Mexican Petes?
Am now in a 3-way mix between spending time in our house in France, visiting places with the children that I know they will enjoy, before they’re too old (Paris next month, Morocco in October), doing bits of tourism on the back of work trips, and going on random jaunts with my country-collecting friend. The Balkan’s, as a driving trip, is on the visit with children list.
My friend has mooted Cote D’Ivoire in January (he tends to co-opt me for the Francophone countries). Anyone been?
My son-in-law is our incoming ambassador to Morocco, so we'll be spending Christmas and New Year there. Tips on things to see welcome!
In general I think owning a holiday place is a two-edged sword - nice to rely on it, but as you've found it tends to pull one back to revisiting the same place.
We’ve just about found the right balance. We’re going to start letting it soon, and that’ll mean we can generally focus on going there out of season. At least until we’ve installed a swimming pool. It’s been unpleasantly hot in central France so far this summer, too frequently in the mid-high 30s.
I think I’ll encourage my children to marry future ambassadors. Our Morocco trip isn’t the first time in the country but it’ll be our first visit to Tangier and Fes. Particularly looking forward to Tangier because I really enjoyed Algiers a few years ago and it looks like a similar vibe but with more tourist infrastructure. Last time we did Marrakech, the Atlas, desert and Essaouira.
If Reform look like heading towards a national landslide, nationwide tactical could surely come into play.
It won't escape people's notice that they could have a legislature with hundreds of Trumpist-alike MPs.
It might well escape the electorate's notice. Quite a lot escapes the electorate's notice. I'm rather keen on democracy, but even I wouldn't claim the electorate are that good at getting under the skin of a party's offer.
The contrast between year one of Starmer's government and year one of Blair's is quite telling.
Within the first 12 months Blair had passed many changes that he wanted. Devolution, BoE independence, minimum wage etc etc etc all happened in the first 12 months.
What the hell has Starmer done? Announcements that planning will be changed. Announcements that this, that or the other will happen.
Where are the changes? We could have had a new planning system in place by now.
Starmer is the sort of dull plodder who’d arrange a meeting to discuss a meeting.
It is also the Cabinet. A lot of those Blair ideas where brought to the table by powerful cabinet members who had spent the opposition years thinking out plans. Absolute no sign of that except for Miliband and probably Streeting.
I'm inclined to agree with that. I think there is a lot of important stuff bubbling under, but very little to see.
I think they need to remember "We were elected as Labour, we need to govern as Labour" - not in the sense of caving in to the nutter wing, but in the sense of Wilson's “The Labour party is a moral crusade or it is nothing.”
I like that we have a real Government for the first time in years, but they are timid little mice.
I'm not too happy (as chair of my CLP), and interested in whether Corbyn and colleagues come up with something viable and outward-looking (I've no interest in internal wrangling). But an issue is what counts as newsworthy in a society where the press is increasingly unimportant. The way to get coverage seems to be stunts (as epitomised by Ed Davey), and serious initiatives that will take years to form fully pass almost unnoticed, except for special interest groups, who are against them.
At what point does anti Reform tactical voting enter the fray ?
It will be a huge issue in the next election. There will be a major battle in hundreds of seats as to what is the right anti-Reform vote.
I suspect there will be far more people prepared to vote for whoever is most likely to eject Starmer. See the relative approval trajectories of Starmer and Farage.
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
Do you believe if you write Mel Stride on here enough times he becomes LOTO?
If it's not Jenrick I'm a Dutchman.
There are surely more Dutch Petes than Mexican Petes?
In considering Kemi and the Tories, it is useful to look at it from differenr points of view. This is one of the charmes of FPTP.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Good morning
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Why ?
Why my sad thought? Because you can govern well and lose; and you can govern not well and win. Getting the psephology right matters.
I am of course assuming that to politicians (not the rest of us) retaining power is number one objective. Sad thought. Perhaps too sad?
It just seems strange that you are suggesting even if Labour do not govern especially well, you think it is more important they win the next election then govern in the country's best interests
I thought his comment was fairly clearly predicated on how Labour might win the election without governing well ?
At what point does anti Reform tactical voting enter the fray ?
It will be a huge issue in the next election. There will be a major battle in hundreds of seats as to what is the right anti-Reform vote.
I suspect there will be far more people prepared to vote for whoever is most likely to eject Starmer. See the relative approval trajectories of Starmer and Farage.
At what point does anti Reform tactical voting enter the fray ?
It will be a huge issue in the next election. There will be a major battle in hundreds of seats as to what is the right anti-Reform vote.
I suspect there will be far more people prepared to vote for whoever is most likely to eject Starmer. See the relative approval trajectories of Starmer and Farage.
So do I.
The centrist Dad haven that is PB will happily look at who can beat Reform, but in the real world after four more years of this shambles, who knows.
If Reform look like heading towards a national landslide, nationwide tactical could surely come into play.
It won't escape people's notice that they could have a legislature with hundreds of Trumpist-alike MPs.
It might well escape the electorate's notice. Quite a lot escapes the electorate's notice. I'm rather keen on democracy, but even I wouldn't claim the electorate are that good at getting under the skin of a party's offer.
I think it would be more a question of whether Labour and the Tories spend a lot of time on the loony backgrounds of so many reform candidates.
The Tories in particular may benefit the most from this strategy, I think.
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
What's behind this odd pushing from you of the silly bloater? If course Reform has outflanked the Tories on the right. But the Lib Dems, Labour and the Nationalist Parties are clearly occupying the 'centre-left' that you seem to wish to indulge, and such voters are even less likely to vote for the Tories (though they do seem very happy to offer free advice).
No poll has Jenrick winning back Reform voters, Stride can at least hold the 2024 Sunak vote and add some ex Tories who went Labour or LD last year
Comments
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2025/mar/28/decline-of-cash-credited-for-drop-in-nhs-surgery-for-children-swallowing-objects
But they do significantly damage Conservative claims to be the party of fiscal discipline: What fiscal discipline exactly?
https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/comment/one-year-labour-public-services
Ming vase appears to have been less of a strategy, and more of a sad necessity. They didn't really know how to hit the ground running.
Let us suppose that Labour wish to continue governing, even though they show no sign of enjoying it. Their chances are maximised by two big things: The relative state of the Tories and Reform; and the LDs continuing to stop the Tories (or Reform perhaps) in about 60-80 seats.
If Reform sweep the board, Labour can't govern. Ditto if Tories sweep the board. As long as they are separate parties and both polling middling 20s Labour do OK. Labour win if it is 34, 23,23.
Labour have only two tasks: to stop an electoral pact, and to ensure both Tories and Reform are in the low to mid 20s.
It matters more that they achieve these ends than that they govern especially well. (A sad thought). Their strategists must have worked all this out. It may be worth watching their tactics on this. They need both doing OK at the same time. The same tactic secures the LD seats too.
Had they promised to increase taxes pretty sure they would have been sub 30%, at which point they may no longer have won a majority.
The public are quite clear, we want low taxes and high spending.
* Preferably in the morning before Leon wakes up.
And do you really believe Labour have strategists?
The Ha-Ha at the Royal crescent in Bath keeps the plebs away from the elite
A tax rise that reduced the differential tax rates between earned and unearned incomes.
Far from calling anything out, Labour should do the same thing again. Cut the NI rate (ultimately abolishing it) while extending the freeze on thresholds so unearned incomes get taxed more while salaried incomes are protected.
The stock of ruses is now empty, and various bills have come due.
Supply and demand is a factor here. It rather looks as if the people needing 29% are the care workers.
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/feb/25/government-u-turn-on-plans-to-double-number-of-medical-students-in-england
'It matters more they achieve these ends then they govern especially well'
Why ?
Thought that, if he encased in anything, it was a honey jar!
Yes, they have psephological strategists. At the last election their tactics worked well. It's political strategists, narrative creation and common sense they seem short of.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/live/cly1xzp5mjkt
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/20940146-cooking-with-pooh
I believe quite a large part of the SOE remit was setting up operations by foreign troops, Anthropoid probably the most famous example.
Meanwhile, after much thought. I voted Labour rather than LibDem for the same reason. I have to say the LibDems didn't seem to be really trying in Witham; probably concentrating efforts on Chelmsford (successfully) and Colchester, a former LibDem seat (unsuccessfully).
I am of course assuming that to politicians (not the rest of us) retaining power is number one objective. Sad thought. Perhaps too sad?
Gutted Councils do not have adequate resource to regulate adequately.
There are a number of things that need to be back in house, starting with Building Inspectors.
This area is full of 'omeless aitches that never get pronounced, so I 'ave to find 'ousing for the refugees.
The issue I have is that no Government has given thought as to how the magic productivity fairy can be called into existence - because that seems to be what they are seeking.
And the reality is that the magic fairy doesn't exist - you need to invest in infrastructure or technology to increase productivity and both cost money.
You just can't hear anything against the EU, and you cling to the naive idea, utterly exploded by Sir Useless and his pisspoor Government every single day, that if only nice centrist technocrats can all get together and professionally sort things out without any noisy interference from the Daily Mail reading classes, the world would be a wonderful and efficient place. Actually such people are the biggest wreckers and responsible for almost all the major ills that beset our country.
Because the answer to we are striking for more money is you got 22% last year (I know it wasn't structured like that but facts don't matter). At which point the Doctors start looking greedy rather than unlucky.
Now if they were striking because of the new role allocation system I would accept that totally...
When will she ever learn ?
There are often fences at horse trials called "the sunken wall", which is a Mini Ha-Ha. When I used to watch Badminton Horse Trials, they always had a sunken wall fence.
Not sure if it is the ball, players, or umpires !!!!!
Firstly and genuinely they deserve some more power for their vote share including at the GE.
Secondly it will give the public something to go on beyond rhetoric.
Thirdly it might make their own politicians think about how to do stuff, rather than just be the best at moaning.
There are some infrastructure projects that need Government support these days, but the best way forward to me is to reduce taxation on businesses and allow them to grow. As they grow, their infrastructure requirements will become apparent, and Government can support.
I think one should first decide if one clearly prefers a party, and if so vote for it. If one doesn't have much preference between two or three, and dislikes another option, than vote tactically.
Again, Labour coming in thinking 'We're the nice Government - we will succeed because like-minded people will do everything we want.'
If Badenoch were removed most of her MP backers and former Cleverly backers would back Stride over Jenrick. Probably enough to give him a coronation as Michael Howard got in 2003 to ensure he not Davis replaced IDS.
Stride can also offer a heavyweight fiscal conservative programme to centrist swing voters. Kemi has proved she can't out war on woke Farage and nor could Jenrick out Farage on stopping the boats and immigration
I'm rather hoping that the doctors have overplayed their hand, and those who didn't vote in the recent ballot will be regretting it. The actual majority in favour as a proportion of all RDs was pretty small, and I suspect/hope the BMA will face a gradual backlash and a desire for the doctors to moderate their demands significantly.
Remarks trigger fierce backlash among conservatives who accuse force of labelling mainstream views as extreme"
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/2025/07/11/people-traditional-values-could-extremists-canadian-police
Replace all NI as income tax and charge it at the combined rate to all taxpayers.
In general I think owning a holiday place is a two-edged sword - nice to rely on it, but as you've found it tends to pull one back to revisiting the same place.
If it's not Jenrick I'm a Dutchman.
It won't escape people's notice that they could have a legislature with hundreds of Trumpist-alike MPs.
I did vote for Blair twice so I have voted Labour previously, but having experienced Labour here in Wales for decades they need to lose the Senedd
I really hoped Starmer would restore responsible government but he and Reeves have simply failed to the point they have lost the public and allowed the rise of Reform
Or was it ?
Are the Conservative membership really in the mood to accept that?
The real obstacle to more doctors isn't so much the number of undergraduates as the number of postgraduate training places and the quality of training in them. I suspect that an expansion of these would do more for the NHS and for settling the forthcoming strikes than a pay rise. The discontent amongst the juniors is more about career progression and rotations than pay as far as I can tell.
I am not in the BMA so didn't vote in this ballot, but note that the turnout was way down. I think the Strikes will have few participants and fizzle out this time around. I don't get the same sense of grievance as when the pay rise was so far behind inflation 2 years ago.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000k4f1
Sadly they are men and women of straw
I don't think @algarkirk was actually endorsing that.
I think I’ll encourage my children to marry future ambassadors. Our Morocco trip isn’t the first time in the country but it’ll be our first visit to Tangier and Fes. Particularly looking forward to Tangier because I really enjoyed Algiers a few years ago and it looks like a similar vibe but with more tourist infrastructure. Last time we did Marrakech, the Atlas, desert and Essaouira.
Reform and Plaid are likely to do very well
The centrist Dad haven that is PB will happily look at who can beat Reform, but in the real world after four more years of this shambles, who knows.
The Tories in particular may benefit the most from this strategy, I think.