The Court of Appeal is livestreaming its proceedings in case anyone has trouble sleeping.
I've been to the Rolls Building (Upper) to listen into one on VAT. I gave up after 20 minutes as the QC (then) loved the sound of his own voice. He lost.
I'll be amazed if the appeal succeeds. Too much loot at stake.
I know enough about that industry to know that the appeal has zero chance of success - the law changed on April 6th 2016 and Mainpay simply ignored the changes for their own profit (because it allowed them to get workers who would otherwise have gone elsewhere).
Always quite interesting when a leader gets a lot of press criticism as Badenoch has been doing. Clearly the first thought is that the leader concerned is doing a bad job, but then you start to wonder if the criticism is levelled because they fear that she might be doing, or start to be doing a good job.
(Hard really to judge with KB in my view, but I do think she may be improving - with a small chance of actually becoming good, and is far better than most of her potential replacements)
Being at 17% in the polls is difficult to spin as a "good job".
Kemmi isn't great, but I can't see how anyone else does better. They were booted out of office for the cumulative sins of the preceding 14 years (during which time they didn't exactly cover themselves in glory). Thus every PMQs Starmer can stand there chanting "14 years" to bat away almost all her attacks.
Meanwhile, because they let immigration run riot in a country that's deeply sceptical about immigration, Farage has wandered in, eaten their lunch and is halfway through their dinner too.
What are their options? Claim the last 14 years was nothing to do with them? Most of her were ministers, so that doesn't work. Claim it was all a terrible mistake, and they've learned from it?
No - their goose is cooked. They aren't pining for the fjords, they are dead, they have ceased to be, they have gone to join the choir invisible. The only thing is not all of them seem to have realised it yet.
Jenrick would probably get a 5% swing from Reform if he took over as leader.
Would he? What has Jenrick campaigned on that both Starmer and Farage could not bat away with, “yeah, no, that was your lot”?
I am still of the opinion that is there was something really big against Trump it would have been used by now. The media have had 12 years to use it. Instead it will be drip drip of rather embarrassing here is Trump at an event and so is Epstein. But of course we know so was all the rich and famous.
Trump and Epstein were much closer friends than a casual meet up on the NY social scene.
One thing we see in a lot of these scandals, similar to the UK ones in TV entertainment, are some of the changing ideas about sex with young, often underage girls. In the Seventies and Eighties it wasn't considered a big deal. Just men being men, and sexual liberation, even in mainstream films such as Pretty Woman, or Rita, Sue and Bob Too.
One thing people forget with Eighties nostalgia is how dark things could be at the time.
But it hasn't changed that much since Me Too. If they had something really bad it surely would have been deployed to stop him ever being president again. And the Democrats (who will have been at a lot of the events) paid for research on him, law officials have dug into his affairs* and the media go over everything in minute detail for 12 years.
* I mean the criminal conviction they got him on was overstating the value of property to get a loan which he paid back. I mean that seems pretty small beer if they had Epstein material to connect him.
Me Too was a load of horse manure
Says an older man...
The exposures of what went on with Al-Fayad, and also in my own profession* shows that predatory sexual behaviour of older men on younger women (and men) is not unusual at all. Indeed it has probably been so throughout history and across many societies.
The question is, should we tolerate it for the future?
There are currently 2 NHS trusts and at least one medical union which supports doctors who want to watch a female colleague undress or undress in front of her against her consent and are spending taxpayers' money arguing this. Voyeurism and indecent exposure are of course criminal offences. Women who have complained about this have been punished.
So the answer to your question is that we are already tolerating it and, in some cases, encouraging and enabling it.
Given that Dr Beth Upton has been compared on here to Brian Blessed and Mrs Brown's Boys, and that - IIUC - @Cyclefree implied that she was in the changing room to ogle the staff (instead of, y'know, change), it would appear that the dirty is being flung in both directions.
By people on PB, not by witnesses giving testimony under oath. A tiny difference, you might agree.
Ask yourself why Upton didn't change in the doctors changing rooms?
Ask yourself if Upton still has his penis and testicles (rumoured to be trying for a child with his wife)?
Ask yourself if removing yourself from a situation is 'escalation' and 'misbehaviour'?
I am very GC and I am loving the sophistry and frankly bullshit from some of these highly qualified medical professionals. Do they really not know how chromosomes etc work? Do they really believe that being a male or female is somehow 'assigned' after delivery?
Its extraordinary.
If you think that having a penis and testicles disqualifies one from being a woman then I would be tempted to agree with you, and I think GRCs should be made contingent on that. But IIUC you would not agree with her presence in a woman-only space regardless of whether she had lopped them off or not.
Yes - I am of the opinion that you cannot become a woman if you start as a man. I know not everyone will agree. I think there are better ways for society to advance than by compromising women's single sex spaces to allow men in.
I am still of the opinion that is there was something really big against Trump it would have been used by now. The media have had 12 years to use it. Instead it will be drip drip of rather embarrassing here is Trump at an event and so is Epstein. But of course we know so was all the rich and famous.
Trump and Epstein were much closer friends than a casual meet up on the NY social scene.
One thing we see in a lot of these scandals, similar to the UK ones in TV entertainment, are some of the changing ideas about sex with young, often underage girls. In the Seventies and Eighties it wasn't considered a big deal. Just men being men, and sexual liberation, even in mainstream films such as Pretty Woman, or Rita, Sue and Bob Too.
One thing people forget with Eighties nostalgia is how dark things could be at the time.
But it hasn't changed that much since Me Too. If they had something really bad it surely would have been deployed to stop him ever being president again. And the Democrats (who will have been at a lot of the events) paid for research on him, law officials have dug into his affairs* and the media go over everything in minute detail for 12 years.
* I mean the criminal conviction they got him on was overstating the value of property to get a loan which he paid back. I mean that seems pretty small beer if they had Epstein material to connect him.
Me Too was a load of horse manure
Says an older man...
The exposures of what went on with Al-Fayad, and also in my own profession* shows that predatory sexual behaviour of older men on younger women (and men) is not unusual at all. Indeed it has probably been so throughout history and across many societies.
The question is, should we tolerate it for the future?
There are currently 2 NHS trusts and at least one medical union which supports doctors who want to watch a female colleague undress or undress in front of her against her consent and are spending taxpayers' money arguing this. Voyeurism and indecent exposure are of course criminal offences. Women who have complained about this have been punished.
So the answer to your question is that we are already tolerating it and, in some cases, encouraging and enabling it.
Given that Dr Beth Upton has been compared on here to Brian Blessed and Mrs Brown's Boys, and that - IIUC - @Cyclefree implied that she was in the changing room to ogle the staff (instead of, y'know, change), it would appear that the dirty is being flung in both directions.
There’s certainly some weirdly lascivious ogling over the details of the Fife case.
I’m mildly struck by the disproportionate interest in the Fife situation over the Darlington one. I’ve certainly heard updates on the former on R4 news but nothing on Darlington. Needless to say the parochial branch of our ‘national broadcaster’ is going mental over Ms Peggie, dunno if there’s similar hysteria on BBC Geordie or whatever it calls itself.
The Court of Appeal is livestreaming its proceedings in case anyone has trouble sleeping.
I've been to the Rolls Building (Upper) to listen into one on VAT. I gave up after 20 minutes as the QC (then) loved the sound of his own voice. He lost.
I'll be amazed if the appeal succeeds. Too much loot at stake.
I know enough about that industry to know that the appeal has zero chance of success - the law changed on April 6th 2016 and Mainpay simply ignored the changes for their own profit (because it allowed them to get workers who would otherwise have gone elsewhere).
It's chancers like Mainpay and Barrowman that have ruined it for genuine subcontractors.
Always quite interesting when a leader gets a lot of press criticism as Badenoch has been doing. Clearly the first thought is that the leader concerned is doing a bad job, but then you start to wonder if the criticism is levelled because they fear that she might be doing, or start to be doing a good job.
(Hard really to judge with KB in my view, but I do think she may be improving - with a small chance of actually becoming good, and is far better than most of her potential replacements)
Being at 17% in the polls is difficult to spin as a "good job".
Kemmi isn't great, but I can't see how anyone else does better. They were booted out of office for the cumulative sins of the preceding 14 years (during which time they didn't exactly cover themselves in glory). Thus every PMQs Starmer can stand there chanting "14 years" to bat away almost all her attacks.
Meanwhile, because they let immigration run riot in a country that's deeply sceptical about immigration, Farage has wandered in, eaten their lunch and is halfway through their dinner too.
What are their options? Claim the last 14 years was nothing to do with them? Most of her were ministers, so that doesn't work. Claim it was all a terrible mistake, and they've learned from it?
No - their goose is cooked. They aren't pining for the fjords, they are dead, they have ceased to be, they have gone to join the choir invisible. The only thing is not all of them seem to have realised it yet.
Jenrick would probably get a 5% swing from Reform if he took over as leader.
Would he? What has Jenrick campaigned on that both Starmer and Farage could not bat away with, “yeah, no, that was your lot”?
Picking up @Leon 's post about the "764" network from last night , I think his summary is valid in many respects.
Islamist threats being 1st at present, with Far Right coming up on the rails, iirc roughly matches Prevent statistics over the last few years. Far left are quiescent by comparison; Antifa does not extensively exist in an organised form in the UK; it did in the 1990s in one form to oppose Far Right violence with violence (I have a book about it), and could return at the edges. Leon's post:
My counter-terror friend told me that about 20% of his work, and rising, is now dedicated to this. Something of which I have never heard. It's called The Com
Another 10% is pure Neo Nazis, the grave majority is Islamism, still, and it hasn't got better, it's likely getting worse
What are impure Nazis? Ones who occasionally do sick stuff just for a laugh rather than out of rancid hatred for everyone not like themselves?
Basically, yes
That Sky story tallies entirely with what my friend told me about “the com”. And I’d never heard of it or them until tonight
Some of the stuff he told me was truly mind scrambling. And also ominous
The government is close to losing control on several fronts. Put it that way
I think Sky are hanging it on the "neo-Nazi" headline hook, because a complicated account around motiveless (ie nihilistic imo, borrowing my word from earlier) abuse would be more difficult in the popular media. Hope Not Hate covered this, following up the same conviction, in their "State of Hate 2025" report, and date it's origins back to 2021. Their assessment positions 764 as:
764 is likely the most extreme and organised example of a disturbing trend of children and young people being radicalised online through an obsession with gruesome material and death rather than a well defined political ideology.
There is also a label "“No Lives Matter” (NLM)". There are examples other than Cameron Finnigan, eg " Vincent Charlton, 17, was jailed for terrorism offences and having videos of a girl cutting his name into her body in 2023.". 2yrs 4 mths - juvenile so a light sentence, I assume.
I'd say there could perhaps be a "self-adopted franchise of the brand" nature to it, as happened with iirc Al-Qaeda as they expanded. People do things and call themselves 764. So it has a centre, but also replicates locally.
I think I also see an echo of Andrew Tate in the target group, in that young and vulnerable people online are targeted, as they are easier to groom. Tate has repeatedly stated that he likes younger women aged 18-19 because he can "imprint" on them. *
Well I'm grateful you're not flat out calling me a liar, like @Roger and @Mexicanpete or a "racist" blah blah - simply for reporting what this guy told me over rose wine in The Groucho. He is very senior in counter terror - and I mean as senior as you can get without actually being way up in MI5/6 or in the Cabinet. He is summoned to all the major crises
He was really interesting just on the details of how it works that high up, the super-max levels of clearance in this weird hi tech building in W London
And he did not expressly say "the government is panicked" but he did say "clueless" and "helpless" and very scared of the risk of public unrest over migration/asylum. This is hardly news, or me editorialising, it is all over the media these last weeks. It also tallies with what I've heard from other people in politics/media this last week
The Com stuff was, however, entirely new to me. Some of the stories are profoundly disturbing. Nihilistic violence simply for the sake of it. Grotesque
My friend and I are probably embarking on a long term project together in September, so I may have more reports which frightened idiots can dismiss as lies
Why haven't you flagged @mexicanbastard and @roger for breaching site rules. They can't use unparliamentary language like "liar". Ban their arses.
I made the mistake of looking at this tweeter. The Composite Guy = The Racist Guy. Have a look at his highlights. E.g. "Africans on average have an IQ of between 70-80", among lots of other racist, obnoxious dross. It's none of my business, but personally I'd like PBers to desist from re-tweeting overtly racist, obnoxious tweeters.
Always quite interesting when a leader gets a lot of press criticism as Badenoch has been doing. Clearly the first thought is that the leader concerned is doing a bad job, but then you start to wonder if the criticism is levelled because they fear that she might be doing, or start to be doing a good job.
(Hard really to judge with KB in my view, but I do think she may be improving - with a small chance of actually becoming good, and is far better than most of her potential replacements)
Being at 17% in the polls is difficult to spin as a "good job".
Kemmi isn't great, but I can't see how anyone else does better. They were booted out of office for the cumulative sins of the preceding 14 years (during which time they didn't exactly cover themselves in glory). Thus every PMQs Starmer can stand there chanting "14 years" to bat away almost all her attacks.
Meanwhile, because they let immigration run riot in a country that's deeply sceptical about immigration, Farage has wandered in, eaten their lunch and is halfway through their dinner too.
What are their options? Claim the last 14 years was nothing to do with them? Most of her were ministers, so that doesn't work. Claim it was all a terrible mistake, and they've learned from it?
No - their goose is cooked. They aren't pining for the fjords, they are dead, they have ceased to be, they have gone to join the choir invisible. The only thing is not all of them seem to have realised it yet.
Jenrick would probably get a 5% swing from Reform if he took over as leader.
It should be too obvious to need saying, but the problem for any party with opponents on both sides is that if it tries to reposition itself to increase its support, the gains on one side will tend to be offset by losses on the other.
I am still of the opinion that is there was something really big against Trump it would have been used by now. The media have had 12 years to use it. Instead it will be drip drip of rather embarrassing here is Trump at an event and so is Epstein. But of course we know so was all the rich and famous.
Trump and Epstein were much closer friends than a casual meet up on the NY social scene.
One thing we see in a lot of these scandals, similar to the UK ones in TV entertainment, are some of the changing ideas about sex with young, often underage girls. In the Seventies and Eighties it wasn't considered a big deal. Just men being men, and sexual liberation, even in mainstream films such as Pretty Woman, or Rita, Sue and Bob Too.
One thing people forget with Eighties nostalgia is how dark things could be at the time.
But it hasn't changed that much since Me Too. If they had something really bad it surely would have been deployed to stop him ever being president again. And the Democrats (who will have been at a lot of the events) paid for research on him, law officials have dug into his affairs* and the media go over everything in minute detail for 12 years.
* I mean the criminal conviction they got him on was overstating the value of property to get a loan which he paid back. I mean that seems pretty small beer if they had Epstein material to connect him.
Me Too was a load of horse manure
Says an older man...
The exposures of what went on with Al-Fayad, and also in my own profession* shows that predatory sexual behaviour of older men on younger women (and men) is not unusual at all. Indeed it has probably been so throughout history and across many societies.
The question is, should we tolerate it for the future?
There are currently 2 NHS trusts and at least one medical union which supports doctors who want to watch a female colleague undress or undress in front of her against her consent and are spending taxpayers' money arguing this. Voyeurism and indecent exposure are of course criminal offences. Women who have complained about this have been punished.
So the answer to your question is that we are already tolerating it and, in some cases, encouraging and enabling it.
Given that Dr Beth Upton has been compared on here to Brian Blessed and Mrs Brown's Boys, and that - IIUC - @Cyclefree implied that she was in the changing room to ogle the staff (instead of, y'know, change), it would appear that the dirty is being flung in both directions.
By people on PB, not by witnesses giving testimony under oath. A tiny difference, you might agree.
Ask yourself why Upton didn't change in the doctors changing rooms?
Ask yourself if Upton still has his penis and testicles (rumoured to be trying for a child with his wife)?
Ask yourself if removing yourself from a situation is 'escalation' and 'misbehaviour'?
I am very GC and I am loving the sophistry and frankly bullshit from some of these highly qualified medical professionals. Do they really not know how chromosomes etc work? Do they really believe that being a male or female is somehow 'assigned' after delivery?
Its extraordinary.
If you think that having a penis and testicles disqualifies one from being a woman then I would be tempted to agree with you, and I think GRCs should be made contingent on that. But IIUC you would not agree with her presence in a woman-only space regardless of whether she had lopped them off or not.
Yes - I am of the opinion that you cannot become a woman if you start as a man. I know not everyone will agree. I think there are better ways for society to advance than by compromising women's single sex spaces to allow men in.
Anyway, that battle's won, so please can we get on to throwing the queers out of men's toilets?
I am still of the opinion that is there was something really big against Trump it would have been used by now. The media have had 12 years to use it. Instead it will be drip drip of rather embarrassing here is Trump at an event and so is Epstein. But of course we know so was all the rich and famous.
Trump and Epstein were much closer friends than a casual meet up on the NY social scene.
One thing we see in a lot of these scandals, similar to the UK ones in TV entertainment, are some of the changing ideas about sex with young, often underage girls. In the Seventies and Eighties it wasn't considered a big deal. Just men being men, and sexual liberation, even in mainstream films such as Pretty Woman, or Rita, Sue and Bob Too.
One thing people forget with Eighties nostalgia is how dark things could be at the time.
But it hasn't changed that much since Me Too. If they had something really bad it surely would have been deployed to stop him ever being president again. And the Democrats (who will have been at a lot of the events) paid for research on him, law officials have dug into his affairs* and the media go over everything in minute detail for 12 years.
* I mean the criminal conviction they got him on was overstating the value of property to get a loan which he paid back. I mean that seems pretty small beer if they had Epstein material to connect him.
Me Too was a load of horse manure
Says an older man...
The exposures of what went on with Al-Fayad, and also in my own profession* shows that predatory sexual behaviour of older men on younger women (and men) is not unusual at all. Indeed it has probably been so throughout history and across many societies.
The question is, should we tolerate it for the future?
There are currently 2 NHS trusts and at least one medical union which supports doctors who want to watch a female colleague undress or undress in front of her against her consent and are spending taxpayers' money arguing this. Voyeurism and indecent exposure are of course criminal offences. Women who have complained about this have been punished.
So the answer to your question is that we are already tolerating it and, in some cases, encouraging and enabling it.
Given that Dr Beth Upton has been compared on here to Brian Blessed and Mrs Brown's Boys, and that - IIUC - @Cyclefree implied that she was in the changing room to ogle the staff (instead of, y'know, change), it would appear that the dirty is being flung in both directions.
Fun fact, Brian Blessed taught me lessons on how to be subtle.
"More dangerous still to Badenoch’s prospects is a very specific charge. It is said that she is failing to press home political attacks on the small-boats crisis because she is worried it will invite scrutiny of the way her parents got her citizenship. The accusation that Badenoch is an “anchor baby”, that her parents took advantage of British citizenship laws in the early 1980s to get their daughter a passport, has circulated for some time on the fringes of Tory and media circles, and been denied in the past by Badenoch. “It’s the elephant in the room,” said one source regarding the way Badenoch got her British citizenship."
That's an excellent piece on Kemi Badenoch in the Staggers
She's done
It is, and she ought to be, except for one thing.
Bad as she is, replacing her doesn't necessarily solve much, and on balance probably makes things worse. Jimmy C the Catford Kid isn't acceptable, because he doesn't bellyfeel the direction the British right is going. And Bobby J is just too tarnished by his tawdriness. Fine for social media attack doggery, but is there any sign he can cope with a forum where people ask him questions?
The Conservative Party is in a kind of zugzwang, where every possible move loses. They probably have been for a while. I wonder when the decisive mistake was? The obvious one was elevating BoJo, but even that seemed unavoidable in 2019. So how did they force themselves into that corner?
The Tories have never recovered their ground since half of them lost and the other half of them won the 2016 Referendum, Cameron revealed there wasn't a plan and bottled out.
The point at which they lost it follows from that. It is the period in which with the UK Tory government's backing the EU became an organisation we could neither remain in nor leave. That is down to the lack of foresight of both Mrs T and Major's governments.
The strategic error was Cameron’s decision to back one side. He should have remained aloof and promised to implement whatever the country voted for.
Don't see how that could have worked. He would have been asked constantly what his real opinion was.
That's an excellent piece on Kemi Badenoch in the Staggers
She's done
Plenty of meat in that article!
She's been done for some time now, its more a case of when the men in grey suits pull the trigger.
Is it best to let her hang on another year or get it done with post conference?
Cleverly or Jenrick would be my best guess on potential successors. I get the feeling that Reform are going to be very hard to shift for the right wing vote
"More dangerous still to Badenoch’s prospects is a very specific charge. It is said that she is failing to press home political attacks on the small-boats crisis because she is worried it will invite scrutiny of the way her parents got her citizenship. The accusation that Badenoch is an “anchor baby”, that her parents took advantage of British citizenship laws in the early 1980s to get their daughter a passport, has circulated for some time on the fringes of Tory and media circles, and been denied in the past by Badenoch. “It’s the elephant in the room,” said one source regarding the way Badenoch got her British citizenship."
Shades of the Obama birther conspiracy there.
Is there any doubt about how Badenoch got her citizenship? Personally I think it's inspiring that an immigrant could become PM, and the most interesting thing about her. But it doesn't fit the groupthink so must be rejected.
Always quite interesting when a leader gets a lot of press criticism as Badenoch has been doing. Clearly the first thought is that the leader concerned is doing a bad job, but then you start to wonder if the criticism is levelled because they fear that she might be doing, or start to be doing a good job.
(Hard really to judge with KB in my view, but I do think she may be improving - with a small chance of actually becoming good, and is far better than most of her potential replacements)
She needs to start talking about the right thing, not waffling about her background when asked a completely different question.
I think her leadership has a touch of Ed Miliband's set in, once people think you are not good in the job, that attitude becomes hard to shift
"More dangerous still to Badenoch’s prospects is a very specific charge. It is said that she is failing to press home political attacks on the small-boats crisis because she is worried it will invite scrutiny of the way her parents got her citizenship. The accusation that Badenoch is an “anchor baby”, that her parents took advantage of British citizenship laws in the early 1980s to get their daughter a passport, has circulated for some time on the fringes of Tory and media circles, and been denied in the past by Badenoch. “It’s the elephant in the room,” said one source regarding the way Badenoch got her British citizenship."
Shades of the Obama birther conspiracy there.
Is there any doubt about how Badenoch got her citizenship? Personally I think it's inspiring that an immigrant could become PM, and the most interesting thing about her. But it doesn't fit the groupthink so must be rejected.
Don’t worry @williamglenn will probably be offering her a fiver and a packet of crisps as an incentive to self deport.
Edit: didn’t realise he had been banned - when did that happen?
"More dangerous still to Badenoch’s prospects is a very specific charge. It is said that she is failing to press home political attacks on the small-boats crisis because she is worried it will invite scrutiny of the way her parents got her citizenship. The accusation that Badenoch is an “anchor baby”, that her parents took advantage of British citizenship laws in the early 1980s to get their daughter a passport, has circulated for some time on the fringes of Tory and media circles, and been denied in the past by Badenoch. “It’s the elephant in the room,” said one source regarding the way Badenoch got her British citizenship."
Shades of the Obama birther conspiracy there.
The Anchor baby comment is quite interesting in that AFAIK there have been 10 major changes to citizenship laws since 1983 (the key date for de-anchoring).
That's an excellent piece on Kemi Badenoch in the Staggers
She's done
It is, and she ought to be, except for one thing.
Bad as she is, replacing her doesn't necessarily solve much, and on balance probably makes things worse. Jimmy C the Catford Kid isn't acceptable, because he doesn't bellyfeel the direction the British right is going. And Bobby J is just too tarnished by his tawdriness. Fine for social media attack doggery, but is there any sign he can cope with a forum where people ask him questions?
The Conservative Party is in a kind of zugzwang, where every possible move loses. They probably have been for a while. I wonder when the decisive mistake was? The obvious one was elevating BoJo, but even that seemed unavoidable in 2019. So how did they force themselves into that corner?
The Tories have never recovered their ground since half of them lost and the other half of them won the 2016 Referendum, Cameron revealed there wasn't a plan and bottled out.
The point at which they lost it follows from that. It is the period in which with the UK Tory government's backing the EU became an organisation we could neither remain in nor leave. That is down to the lack of foresight of both Mrs T and Major's governments.
The strategic error was Cameron’s decision to back one side. He should have remained aloof and promised to implement whatever the country voted for.
Don't see how that could have worked. He would have been asked constantly what his real opinion was.
I suspect the more ordure laden facts that appear to him means the harder and faster he goes after Obama, Hillary, Biden, Comey, Wray etc, etc, etc.
I genuinely believe as the Epstein saga unfolds the greater the diversionary subterfuge, and the greater the jeopardy for Trump's political foes.
Time for a lot of senior Dems to move to Canada?
I am not sure that helps.
Watching MSBN they suggest the use of the language of treason could set off individual MAGA whack jobs.
It appears Trump was a co-conspirator in spreading the Russia interference "lies"...
https://x.com/pdmcleod/status/1947817790422823030 Trump in 2018: “Let me be totally clear in saying that I accept our intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election took place.”
It’s actually an interesting issue for deliveroo et al. They need to allow substitution to avoid everyone becoming a worker (big tax and other issues there) but know that opens up this type of problem
tbh I'm not sure that moving people out of the grey economy into the black economy or even straight-up crime is a good idea. The aim is presumably to remove one of President Macron's pull factors, but it is at best indirect. If HMG wants to deal with asylum seekers then it should do so directly and quickly, not mess around at the edges.
This part seems to misunderstand how delivery riders work:- The agreement with Deliveroo, Just East and Uber Eats enables the firms to identify behaviour which indicates illegal working, such as an account spending a lot of time near one of the hotels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yjpv87v0o
Riders spend time wherever is most convenient for incoming jobs, say near a cluster of takeaways. They don't lie in bed waiting for orders.
I think they are boiling the frog.
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
That's an excellent piece on Kemi Badenoch in the Staggers
She's done
It is, and she ought to be, except for one thing.
Bad as she is, replacing her doesn't necessarily solve much, and on balance probably makes things worse. Jimmy C the Catford Kid isn't acceptable, because he doesn't bellyfeel the direction the British right is going. And Bobby J is just too tarnished by his tawdriness. Fine for social media attack doggery, but is there any sign he can cope with a forum where people ask him questions?
The Conservative Party is in a kind of zugzwang, where every possible move loses. They probably have been for a while. I wonder when the decisive mistake was? The obvious one was elevating BoJo, but even that seemed unavoidable in 2019. So how did they force themselves into that corner?
The Tories have never recovered their ground since half of them lost and the other half of them won the 2016 Referendum, Cameron revealed there wasn't a plan and bottled out.
The point at which they lost it follows from that. It is the period in which with the UK Tory government's backing the EU became an organisation we could neither remain in nor leave. That is down to the lack of foresight of both Mrs T and Major's governments.
The strategic error was Cameron’s decision to back one side. He should have remained aloof and promised to implement whatever the country voted for.
Don't see how that could have worked. He would have been asked constantly what his real opinion was.
And he could constantly have demurred
OK, that worked for Wilson, but that was in a much more deferential era.
More importantly, what would Cameron's implementation of the vote have looked like? Given that the May plan was roundly condemned by Brexit Backers as Not Proper Brexit, what was Dave meant to have done? Resigning in 2016, rather than 2018, was just cutting to the chase.
Ok, different. Perhaps he took Psalm 147 a bit literally: 'He delighteth not in the strength of the horse: he taketh not pleasure in the legs of a man.'
Would Cornwall going independent be the equivalent of cutting off its own legs?
It’s actually an interesting issue for deliveroo et al. They need to allow substitution to avoid everyone becoming a worker (big tax and other issues there) but know that opens up this type of problem
tbh I'm not sure that moving people out of the grey economy into the black economy or even straight-up crime is a good idea. The aim is presumably to remove one of President Macron's pull factors, but it is at best indirect. If HMG wants to deal with asylum seekers then it should do so directly and quickly, not mess around at the edges.
This part seems to misunderstand how delivery riders work:- The agreement with Deliveroo, Just East and Uber Eats enables the firms to identify behaviour which indicates illegal working, such as an account spending a lot of time near one of the hotels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yjpv87v0o
Riders spend time wherever is most convenient for incoming jobs, say near a cluster of takeaways. They don't lie in bed waiting for orders.
I think they are boiling the frog.
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
BBC floating stories about 80% polling support for national ID cards this morning, so I guess they will be on the way shortly.
Time to list again all the ways in which this, a reasonable idea in principle, should not be done. Otherwise they will all be adopted.
It’s actually an interesting issue for deliveroo et al. They need to allow substitution to avoid everyone becoming a worker (big tax and other issues there) but know that opens up this type of problem
tbh I'm not sure that moving people out of the grey economy into the black economy or even straight-up crime is a good idea. The aim is presumably to remove one of President Macron's pull factors, but it is at best indirect. If HMG wants to deal with asylum seekers then it should do so directly and quickly, not mess around at the edges.
This part seems to misunderstand how delivery riders work:- The agreement with Deliveroo, Just East and Uber Eats enables the firms to identify behaviour which indicates illegal working, such as an account spending a lot of time near one of the hotels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yjpv87v0o
Riders spend time wherever is most convenient for incoming jobs, say near a cluster of takeaways. They don't lie in bed waiting for orders.
I think they are boiling the frog.
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
You'd see a lot of legitimate employees out of work too, or not taken on in the first place; it can be hard to establish your right to work unless you are already part of the database state.
It’s actually an interesting issue for deliveroo et al. They need to allow substitution to avoid everyone becoming a worker (big tax and other issues there) but know that opens up this type of problem
tbh I'm not sure that moving people out of the grey economy into the black economy or even straight-up crime is a good idea. The aim is presumably to remove one of President Macron's pull factors, but it is at best indirect. If HMG wants to deal with asylum seekers then it should do so directly and quickly, not mess around at the edges.
This part seems to misunderstand how delivery riders work:- The agreement with Deliveroo, Just East and Uber Eats enables the firms to identify behaviour which indicates illegal working, such as an account spending a lot of time near one of the hotels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yjpv87v0o
Riders spend time wherever is most convenient for incoming jobs, say near a cluster of takeaways. They don't lie in bed waiting for orders.
I think they are boiling the frog.
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
The small business was a chippie which had done almost everything right but not quite, and the 45K fine was watered down. Discounts for admitting liability straight off [edit], etc. etc. made it a mere 23K in the end (I think - the article is slightly unclear on 28 or 23).
But then Option 2 was "object to the decision, which a lawyer advised against as the sum could have soared to £80,000."
That's an excellent piece on Kemi Badenoch in the Staggers
She's done
It is, and she ought to be, except for one thing.
Bad as she is, replacing her doesn't necessarily solve much, and on balance probably makes things worse. Jimmy C the Catford Kid isn't acceptable, because he doesn't bellyfeel the direction the British right is going. And Bobby J is just too tarnished by his tawdriness. Fine for social media attack doggery, but is there any sign he can cope with a forum where people ask him questions?
The Conservative Party is in a kind of zugzwang, where every possible move loses. They probably have been for a while. I wonder when the decisive mistake was? The obvious one was elevating BoJo, but even that seemed unavoidable in 2019. So how did they force themselves into that corner?
The Tories have never recovered their ground since half of them lost and the other half of them won the 2016 Referendum, Cameron revealed there wasn't a plan and bottled out.
The point at which they lost it follows from that. It is the period in which with the UK Tory government's backing the EU became an organisation we could neither remain in nor leave. That is down to the lack of foresight of both Mrs T and Major's governments.
The strategic error was Cameron’s decision to back one side. He should have remained aloof and promised to implement whatever the country voted for.
Don't see how that could have worked. He would have been asked constantly what his real opinion was.
And he could constantly have demurred
OK, that worked for Wilson, but that was in a much more deferential era.
More importantly, what would Cameron's implementation of the vote have looked like? Given that the May plan was roundly condemned by Brexit Backers as Not Proper Brexit, what was Dave meant to have done? Resigning in 2016, rather than 2018, was just cutting to the chase.
You go for a public enquiry / possibly a Royal Commission type approach taking evidence and building a consensus
It’s actually an interesting issue for deliveroo et al. They need to allow substitution to avoid everyone becoming a worker (big tax and other issues there) but know that opens up this type of problem
tbh I'm not sure that moving people out of the grey economy into the black economy or even straight-up crime is a good idea. The aim is presumably to remove one of President Macron's pull factors, but it is at best indirect. If HMG wants to deal with asylum seekers then it should do so directly and quickly, not mess around at the edges.
This part seems to misunderstand how delivery riders work:- The agreement with Deliveroo, Just East and Uber Eats enables the firms to identify behaviour which indicates illegal working, such as an account spending a lot of time near one of the hotels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yjpv87v0o
Riders spend time wherever is most convenient for incoming jobs, say near a cluster of takeaways. They don't lie in bed waiting for orders.
I think they are boiling the frog.
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
Is this not what Macron instructed them to do to reduce the pull factor for the UK that is dragging so many illegal immigrants through Europe? Its good to see someone has a grip, even if it is not our own government.
Always quite interesting when a leader gets a lot of press criticism as Badenoch has been doing. Clearly the first thought is that the leader concerned is doing a bad job, but then you start to wonder if the criticism is levelled because they fear that she might be doing, or start to be doing a good job.
(Hard really to judge with KB in my view, but I do think she may be improving - with a small chance of actually becoming good, and is far better than most of her potential replacements)
Being at 17% in the polls is difficult to spin as a "good job".
Kemmi isn't great, but I can't see how anyone else does better. They were booted out of office for the cumulative sins of the preceding 14 years (during which time they didn't exactly cover themselves in glory). Thus every PMQs Starmer can stand there chanting "14 years" to bat away almost all her attacks.
Meanwhile, because they let immigration run riot in a country that's deeply sceptical about immigration, Farage has wandered in, eaten their lunch and is halfway through their dinner too.
What are their options? Claim the last 14 years was nothing to do with them? Most of her were ministers, so that doesn't work. Claim it was all a terrible mistake, and they've learned from it?
No - their goose is cooked. They aren't pining for the fjords, they are dead, they have ceased to be, they have gone to join the choir invisible. The only thing is not all of them seem to have realised it yet.
Jenrick would probably get a 5% swing from Reform if he took over as leader.
It should be too obvious to need saying, but the problem for any party with opponents on both sides is that if it tries to reposition itself to increase its support, the gains on one side will tend to be offset by losses on the other.
Tory support is rock bottom at 17% so a 5% swing from Reform would be a real gain, I don't think they'd lose anything of the 17% they already have.
There are 7 local by-elections tomorrow, mostly in Tory territory. We have Con defences in Dorset and Hertsmere, Ind elected as Con in Bromley and Lichfield, a Lab defence in Cardiff, a LD defence in Dacorum, and a non-defence for Green in Rutland.
I know we have had this discussion in 3 out of the 4 test matches to date but to choose to field and then fail to take a single wicket in the morning session with the new ball really raises serious questions in my mind as to whether or not England should have been batting today. India are currently 114/1. That is not so much a question as a statement of the bleeding obvious.
It’s actually an interesting issue for deliveroo et al. They need to allow substitution to avoid everyone becoming a worker (big tax and other issues there) but know that opens up this type of problem
tbh I'm not sure that moving people out of the grey economy into the black economy or even straight-up crime is a good idea. The aim is presumably to remove one of President Macron's pull factors, but it is at best indirect. If HMG wants to deal with asylum seekers then it should do so directly and quickly, not mess around at the edges.
This part seems to misunderstand how delivery riders work:- The agreement with Deliveroo, Just East and Uber Eats enables the firms to identify behaviour which indicates illegal working, such as an account spending a lot of time near one of the hotels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yjpv87v0o
Riders spend time wherever is most convenient for incoming jobs, say near a cluster of takeaways. They don't lie in bed waiting for orders.
I think they are boiling the frog.
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
Is this not what Macron instructed them to do to reduce the pull factor for the UK that is dragging so many illegal immigrants through Europe? Its good to see someone has a grip, even if it is not our own government.
As with so much else the main priority is short term economic factors. What impact do illegal workers have on inflation?
"Kemi Adegoke’s experience was made all the harder because she had a certain idea of Britain. She read Enid Blyton novels as a child. Blyton’s stories are heady patriotic fantasies that portray an unchanging England of rock cakes and cucumber sandwiches. Blytonland, if it ever existed, was already crumbling when Adegoke imaginatively entered it in the Eighties. By 2005 it had all but disappeared. ................................................................................................................................................................... The Conservatives lived up to Badenoch’s Blytonland idea of Britain when the rest of the country did not. It was still old-fashioned and hierarchical. These were her tribe: like her father they wanted things to be “done properly”. The Conservative Party allowed her to transform from outsider to insider and to wield the power her father never achieved in his own career in Nigeria. Politics let her be a somebody in a country where many immigrants are ignored, looked down upon or even despised. The Conservative Party was the means of her ascent. The modernisers who met Adegoke saw in her the spirit of the times, the essence of 2005. As one of them told me: “She was new Britain.”
That's an excellent piece on Kemi Badenoch in the Staggers
She's done
It is, and she ought to be, except for one thing.
Bad as she is, replacing her doesn't necessarily solve much, and on balance probably makes things worse. Jimmy C the Catford Kid isn't acceptable, because he doesn't bellyfeel the direction the British right is going. And Bobby J is just too tarnished by his tawdriness. Fine for social media attack doggery, but is there any sign he can cope with a forum where people ask him questions?
The Conservative Party is in a kind of zugzwang, where every possible move loses. They probably have been for a while. I wonder when the decisive mistake was? The obvious one was elevating BoJo, but even that seemed unavoidable in 2019. So how did they force themselves into that corner?
The Tories have never recovered their ground since half of them lost and the other half of them won the 2016 Referendum, Cameron revealed there wasn't a plan and bottled out.
The point at which they lost it follows from that. It is the period in which with the UK Tory government's backing the EU became an organisation we could neither remain in nor leave. That is down to the lack of foresight of both Mrs T and Major's governments.
The strategic error was Cameron’s decision to back one side. He should have remained aloof and promised to implement whatever the country voted for.
Don't see how that could have worked. He would have been asked constantly what his real opinion was.
And he could constantly have demurred
OK, that worked for Wilson, but that was in a much more deferential era.
More importantly, what would Cameron's implementation of the vote have looked like? Given that the May plan was roundly condemned by Brexit Backers as Not Proper Brexit, what was Dave meant to have done? Resigning in 2016, rather than 2018, was just cutting to the chase.
You go for a public enquiry / possibly a Royal Commission type approach taking evidence and building a consensus
Dave should have done what he promised during the campaign,, invoke Article 50 the day after the vote for Leave. It would have concentrated the minds of the Leavers as to what exact form of Brexit they wanted, and killed off any hope for the Remainers of de-railing Brexit entirely, making them engage with the Brexit process too.
"Kemi Adegoke’s experience was made all the harder because she had a certain idea of Britain. She read Enid Blyton novels as a child. Blyton’s stories are heady patriotic fantasies that portray an unchanging England of rock cakes and cucumber sandwiches. Blytonland, if it ever existed, was already crumbling when Adegoke imaginatively entered it in the Eighties. By 2005 it had all but disappeared. ................................................................................................................................................................... The Conservatives lived up to Badenoch’s Blytonland idea of Britain when the rest of the country did not. It was still old-fashioned and hierarchical. These were her tribe: like her father they wanted things to be “done properly”. The Conservative Party allowed her to transform from outsider to insider and to wield the power her father never achieved in his own career in Nigeria. Politics let her be a somebody in a country where many immigrants are ignored, looked down upon or even despised. The Conservative Party was the means of her ascent. The modernisers who met Adegoke saw in her the spirit of the times, the essence of 2005. As one of them told me: “She was new Britain.”
Always quite interesting when a leader gets a lot of press criticism as Badenoch has been doing. Clearly the first thought is that the leader concerned is doing a bad job, but then you start to wonder if the criticism is levelled because they fear that she might be doing, or start to be doing a good job.
(Hard really to judge with KB in my view, but I do think she may be improving - with a small chance of actually becoming good, and is far better than most of her potential replacements)
Being at 17% in the polls is difficult to spin as a "good job".
Kemmi isn't great, but I can't see how anyone else does better. They were booted out of office for the cumulative sins of the preceding 14 years (during which time they didn't exactly cover themselves in glory). Thus every PMQs Starmer can stand there chanting "14 years" to bat away almost all her attacks.
Meanwhile, because they let immigration run riot in a country that's deeply sceptical about immigration, Farage has wandered in, eaten their lunch and is halfway through their dinner too.
What are their options? Claim the last 14 years was nothing to do with them? Most of her were ministers, so that doesn't work. Claim it was all a terrible mistake, and they've learned from it?
No - their goose is cooked. They aren't pining for the fjords, they are dead, they have ceased to be, they have gone to join the choir invisible. The only thing is not all of them seem to have realised it yet.
Jenrick would probably get a 5% swing from Reform if he took over as leader.
It should be too obvious to need saying, but the problem for any party with opponents on both sides is that if it tries to reposition itself to increase its support, the gains on one side will tend to be offset by losses on the other.
Tory support is rock bottom at 17% so a 5% swing from Reform would be a real gain, I don't think they'd lose anything of the 17% they already have.
If one is minded to vote for a party of floggers, why not stick with the real deal rather than a party led by a chameleon who is a default Cameroonian? Performatively cruel to curry favour is all well and good, but I suspect Reform voters have the Boriswave in the back of their mind, and any switch to Jenrick Tories will be short lived.
It’s actually an interesting issue for deliveroo et al. They need to allow substitution to avoid everyone becoming a worker (big tax and other issues there) but know that opens up this type of problem
tbh I'm not sure that moving people out of the grey economy into the black economy or even straight-up crime is a good idea. The aim is presumably to remove one of President Macron's pull factors, but it is at best indirect. If HMG wants to deal with asylum seekers then it should do so directly and quickly, not mess around at the edges.
This part seems to misunderstand how delivery riders work:- The agreement with Deliveroo, Just East and Uber Eats enables the firms to identify behaviour which indicates illegal working, such as an account spending a lot of time near one of the hotels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yjpv87v0o
Riders spend time wherever is most convenient for incoming jobs, say near a cluster of takeaways. They don't lie in bed waiting for orders.
I think they are boiling the frog.
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
You'd see a lot of legitimate employees out of work too, or not taken on in the first place; it can be hard to establish your right to work unless you are already part of the database state.
Providing sign up is free it shouldn’t be a problem.
All employers should be doing these checks already. If you employ someone without verification and they don’t have the right to work, you are on the hook for £45k.
"Kemi Adegoke’s experience was made all the harder because she had a certain idea of Britain. She read Enid Blyton novels as a child. Blyton’s stories are heady patriotic fantasies that portray an unchanging England of rock cakes and cucumber sandwiches. Blytonland, if it ever existed, was already crumbling when Adegoke imaginatively entered it in the Eighties. By 2005 it had all but disappeared. ................................................................................................................................................................... The Conservatives lived up to Badenoch’s Blytonland idea of Britain when the rest of the country did not. It was still old-fashioned and hierarchical. These were her tribe: like her father they wanted things to be “done properly”. The Conservative Party allowed her to transform from outsider to insider and to wield the power her father never achieved in his own career in Nigeria. Politics let her be a somebody in a country where many immigrants are ignored, looked down upon or even despised. The Conservative Party was the means of her ascent. The modernisers who met Adegoke saw in her the spirit of the times, the essence of 2005. As one of them told me: “She was new Britain.”
If Kemi represents the Britain of 2005, I'll drink to that (Iraq and Afghanistan wars aside).
I suspect the World credit crisis of 2008, austerity, burgeoning social media, Brexit, the Boriswave, Boris Johnson and Covid, Liz Truss, Paul Marshall and the notion that no one needs pay taxes but services should remain as they are or improve has flushed 2005 away forever.
It’s actually an interesting issue for deliveroo et al. They need to allow substitution to avoid everyone becoming a worker (big tax and other issues there) but know that opens up this type of problem
tbh I'm not sure that moving people out of the grey economy into the black economy or even straight-up crime is a good idea. The aim is presumably to remove one of President Macron's pull factors, but it is at best indirect. If HMG wants to deal with asylum seekers then it should do so directly and quickly, not mess around at the edges.
This part seems to misunderstand how delivery riders work:- The agreement with Deliveroo, Just East and Uber Eats enables the firms to identify behaviour which indicates illegal working, such as an account spending a lot of time near one of the hotels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yjpv87v0o
Riders spend time wherever is most convenient for incoming jobs, say near a cluster of takeaways. They don't lie in bed waiting for orders.
I think they are boiling the frog.
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
You'd see a lot of legitimate employees out of work too, or not taken on in the first place; it can be hard to establish your right to work unless you are already part of the database state.
Providing sign up is free it shouldn’t be a problem.
All employers should be doing these checks already. If you employ someone without verification and they don’t have the right to work, you are on the hook for £45k.
It’s actually an interesting issue for deliveroo et al. They need to allow substitution to avoid everyone becoming a worker (big tax and other issues there) but know that opens up this type of problem
tbh I'm not sure that moving people out of the grey economy into the black economy or even straight-up crime is a good idea. The aim is presumably to remove one of President Macron's pull factors, but it is at best indirect. If HMG wants to deal with asylum seekers then it should do so directly and quickly, not mess around at the edges.
This part seems to misunderstand how delivery riders work:- The agreement with Deliveroo, Just East and Uber Eats enables the firms to identify behaviour which indicates illegal working, such as an account spending a lot of time near one of the hotels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yjpv87v0o
Riders spend time wherever is most convenient for incoming jobs, say near a cluster of takeaways. They don't lie in bed waiting for orders.
I think they are boiling the frog.
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
You'd see a lot of legitimate employees out of work too, or not taken on in the first place; it can be hard to establish your right to work unless you are already part of the database state.
Providing sign up is free it shouldn’t be a problem.
All employers should be doing these checks already. If you employ someone without verification and they don’t have the right to work, you are on the hook for £45k.
My global megacorp had to rely on my having been TUPE'd across, because I could not provide the documents requested.
Companies are lazy, I don’t joke when I say the best thing any unemployed person could do with is a passport because most companies are too lazy to go beyond the cheapest checks and just move on to the next candidate who has their passport to hand
It’s why i now have zero tolerance for those who complain about digital ID because they are very much “I’m alright, Jack - so I don’t see the issue”
(I think the closest comparison I can think of is probably what has been changed in the Aldwych.)
I was expecting a Telegraph Explosion, but "Pedestrianise the West End" was item one on their list of "how to improve London" last week:
How to make London great again, according to 10 of our writers With the city struggling to attract tourists compared with its European rivals, these suggestions could help end the malaise .. 1. Pedestrianise the West End Isn’t the answer staring us in the face? It’s time London stopped dilly-dallying and fully pedestrianised not just Oxford Street, but the whole of the West End.
Always quite interesting when a leader gets a lot of press criticism as Badenoch has been doing. Clearly the first thought is that the leader concerned is doing a bad job, but then you start to wonder if the criticism is levelled because they fear that she might be doing, or start to be doing a good job.
(Hard really to judge with KB in my view, but I do think she may be improving - with a small chance of actually becoming good, and is far better than most of her potential replacements)
Being at 17% in the polls is difficult to spin as a "good job".
Kemmi isn't great, but I can't see how anyone else does better. They were booted out of office for the cumulative sins of the preceding 14 years (during which time they didn't exactly cover themselves in glory). Thus every PMQs Starmer can stand there chanting "14 years" to bat away almost all her attacks.
Meanwhile, because they let immigration run riot in a country that's deeply sceptical about immigration, Farage has wandered in, eaten their lunch and is halfway through their dinner too.
What are their options? Claim the last 14 years was nothing to do with them? Most of her were ministers, so that doesn't work. Claim it was all a terrible mistake, and they've learned from it?
No - their goose is cooked. They aren't pining for the fjords, they are dead, they have ceased to be, they have gone to join the choir invisible. The only thing is not all of them seem to have realised it yet.
Jenrick would probably get a 5% swing from Reform if he took over as leader.
It should be too obvious to need saying, but the problem for any party with opponents on both sides is that if it tries to reposition itself to increase its support, the gains on one side will tend to be offset by losses on the other.
Tory support is rock bottom at 17% so a 5% swing from Reform would be a real gain, I don't think they'd lose anything of the 17% they already have.
If one is minded to vote for a party of floggers, why not stick with the real deal rather than a party led by a chameleon who is a default Cameroonian? Performatively cruel to curry favour is all well and good, but I suspect Reform voters have the Boriswave in the back of their mind, and any switch to Jenrick Tories will be short lived.
HYUFD says Stride anyway.
He's a big price (40) for someone with an HYUFD endorsement. I might have a low stakes nibble.
Always quite interesting when a leader gets a lot of press criticism as Badenoch has been doing. Clearly the first thought is that the leader concerned is doing a bad job, but then you start to wonder if the criticism is levelled because they fear that she might be doing, or start to be doing a good job.
(Hard really to judge with KB in my view, but I do think she may be improving - with a small chance of actually becoming good, and is far better than most of her potential replacements)
Being at 17% in the polls is difficult to spin as a "good job".
Kemmi isn't great, but I can't see how anyone else does better. They were booted out of office for the cumulative sins of the preceding 14 years (during which time they didn't exactly cover themselves in glory). Thus every PMQs Starmer can stand there chanting "14 years" to bat away almost all her attacks.
Meanwhile, because they let immigration run riot in a country that's deeply sceptical about immigration, Farage has wandered in, eaten their lunch and is halfway through their dinner too.
What are their options? Claim the last 14 years was nothing to do with them? Most of her were ministers, so that doesn't work. Claim it was all a terrible mistake, and they've learned from it?
No - their goose is cooked. They aren't pining for the fjords, they are dead, they have ceased to be, they have gone to join the choir invisible. The only thing is not all of them seem to have realised it yet.
Jenrick would probably get a 5% swing from Reform if he took over as leader.
It should be too obvious to need saying, but the problem for any party with opponents on both sides is that if it tries to reposition itself to increase its support, the gains on one side will tend to be offset by losses on the other.
Tory support is rock bottom at 17% so a 5% swing from Reform would be a real gain, I don't think they'd lose anything of the 17% they already have.
If one is minded to vote for a party of floggers, why not stick with the real deal rather than a party led by a chameleon who is a default Cameroonian? Performatively cruel to curry favour is all well and good, but I suspect Reform voters have the Boriswave in the back of their mind, and any switch to Jenrick Tories will be short lived.
HYUFD says Stride anyway.
I think the tories would be potty to change leader again so soon. They should just ride this out with a strategy to still be alive after 2029 and with a view to government whenever the election after falls.
That's an excellent piece on Kemi Badenoch in the Staggers
She's done
It is, and she ought to be, except for one thing.
Bad as she is, replacing her doesn't necessarily solve much, and on balance probably makes things worse. Jimmy C the Catford Kid isn't acceptable, because he doesn't bellyfeel the direction the British right is going. And Bobby J is just too tarnished by his tawdriness. Fine for social media attack doggery, but is there any sign he can cope with a forum where people ask him questions?
The Conservative Party is in a kind of zugzwang, where every possible move loses. They probably have been for a while. I wonder when the decisive mistake was? The obvious one was elevating BoJo, but even that seemed unavoidable in 2019. So how did they force themselves into that corner?
The Tories have never recovered their ground since half of them lost and the other half of them won the 2016 Referendum, Cameron revealed there wasn't a plan and bottled out.
The point at which they lost it follows from that. It is the period in which with the UK Tory government's backing the EU became an organisation we could neither remain in nor leave. That is down to the lack of foresight of both Mrs T and Major's governments.
The strategic error was Cameron’s decision to back one side. He should have remained aloof and promised to implement whatever the country voted for.
Don't see how that could have worked. He would have been asked constantly what his real opinion was.
And he could constantly have demurred
OK, that worked for Wilson, but that was in a much more deferential era.
More importantly, what would Cameron's implementation of the vote have looked like? Given that the May plan was roundly condemned by Brexit Backers as Not Proper Brexit, what was Dave meant to have done? Resigning in 2016, rather than 2018, was just cutting to the chase.
Suppose Cameron had a plan of, say, "Norway for Now" to implement if Leave had won then he would have been able to get to work on that straight away after the vote, and build a coalition behind that.
Instead there was a vacuum, "Brexit means Brexit," which was filled by the extremes on both sides.
"Kemi Adegoke’s experience was made all the harder because she had a certain idea of Britain. She read Enid Blyton novels as a child. Blyton’s stories are heady patriotic fantasies that portray an unchanging England of rock cakes and cucumber sandwiches. Blytonland, if it ever existed, was already crumbling when Adegoke imaginatively entered it in the Eighties. By 2005 it had all but disappeared. ................................................................................................................................................................... The Conservatives lived up to Badenoch’s Blytonland idea of Britain when the rest of the country did not. It was still old-fashioned and hierarchical. These were her tribe: like her father they wanted things to be “done properly”. The Conservative Party allowed her to transform from outsider to insider and to wield the power her father never achieved in his own career in Nigeria. Politics let her be a somebody in a country where many immigrants are ignored, looked down upon or even despised. The Conservative Party was the means of her ascent. The modernisers who met Adegoke saw in her the spirit of the times, the essence of 2005. As one of them told me: “She was new Britain.”
I think the artilce says more about the writer than the victim. A nasty dirty little piece by someone who lacks the ability to make money from writing, even like Enid Blyton - there's the rub.
You could just as well say the Just William Books are outdated, or Treasure Island, or Robinson Crusoe. That does not mean they, like Enid Blyton do not have something worth reading.
With adult fiction when I was a kid they were sniffy about Agatha Christie but just see the number of TV adaptions, most of which only work because they simplify the stories within the books themselves.
Flavour of the month when I was a teenager was "Lord of the Flies", it was my set book at O' Level. Looking back I think of the wise words of Dorothy Parker, this is not a book to be cast aside lightly - it should be flung with the greatest violence you can muster against the nearest wall !
I bet the author of the New Stateman piece loved Lord of the Flies. Vile book, vile person.
It’s actually an interesting issue for deliveroo et al. They need to allow substitution to avoid everyone becoming a worker (big tax and other issues there) but know that opens up this type of problem
tbh I'm not sure that moving people out of the grey economy into the black economy or even straight-up crime is a good idea. The aim is presumably to remove one of President Macron's pull factors, but it is at best indirect. If HMG wants to deal with asylum seekers then it should do so directly and quickly, not mess around at the edges.
This part seems to misunderstand how delivery riders work:- The agreement with Deliveroo, Just East and Uber Eats enables the firms to identify behaviour which indicates illegal working, such as an account spending a lot of time near one of the hotels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy4yjpv87v0o
Riders spend time wherever is most convenient for incoming jobs, say near a cluster of takeaways. They don't lie in bed waiting for orders.
I think they are boiling the frog.
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
BBC floating stories about 80% polling support for national ID cards this morning, so I guess they will be on the way shortly.
Time to list again all the ways in which this, a reasonable idea in principle, should not be done. Otherwise they will all be adopted.
Derek Huffman, a 46-year-old Texan father who relocated his family to Russia to escape woke ideology, has been unexpectedly sent to the frontlines of the war against Ukraine, despite assurances of a non-combat role in the Russian military.
Huffman moved his wife, DeAnna, and their three daughters, along with their husky, to Istra near Moscow under Russia's Shared Values visa scheme, designed to attract foreigners who reject neoliberal ideology.
His deployment has occurred with minimal training and limited Russian language skills, raising serious concerns about his prospects for battlefield survival.
Comments
Handy, mind.
I’m mildly struck by the disproportionate interest in the Fife situation over the Darlington one. I’ve certainly heard updates on the former on R4 news but nothing on Darlington. Needless to say the parochial branch of our ‘national broadcaster’ is going mental over Ms Peggie, dunno if there’s similar hysteria on BBC Geordie or whatever it calls itself.
Is your friend called James Bond?
It's none of my business, but personally I'd like PBers to desist from re-tweeting overtly racist, obnoxious tweeters.
Shades of the Obama birther conspiracy there.
She's been done for some time now, its more a case of when the men in grey suits pull the trigger.
Is it best to let her hang on another year or get it done with post conference?
Cleverly or Jenrick would be my best guess on potential successors. I get the feeling that Reform are going to be very hard to shift for the right wing vote
I think her leadership has a touch of Ed Miliband's set in, once people think you are not good in the job, that attitude becomes hard to shift
Edit: didn’t realise he had been banned - when did that happen?
https://x.com/pdmcleod/status/1947817790422823030
Trump in 2018: “Let me be totally clear in saying that I accept our intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election took place.”
https://www.cornwall.gov.uk/council-news/council-budgets-and-economy/cornwall-council-passes-motion-calling-for-cornwall-to-be-recognised-as-the-uk-s-fifth-nation/
In unrelated news:-
Cornwall surgeon accused of fraud over amputation of his own legs
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jul/23/cornwall-surgeon-accused-of-over-amputation-of-his-own-legs
Gradually tightening the rules. There was a BBC article just the other day about a small business that got a £45k fine for employing an illegal.
If they went to my plan (share half the fine with the person reporting and give them indefinite leave to remain) it would demolish the black economy overnight. Even employing people for criminal activities would be liable (see tax).
Hundreds of thousands out of work overnight…
So I think they are preparing Deliveroo et al for a massive crack down.
More importantly, what would Cameron's implementation of the vote have looked like? Given that the May plan was roundly condemned by Brexit Backers as Not Proper Brexit, what was Dave meant to have done? Resigning in 2016, rather than 2018, was just cutting to the chase.
Would Cornwall going independent be the equivalent of cutting off its own legs?
Time to list again all the ways in which this, a reasonable idea in principle, should not be done.
Otherwise they will all be adopted.
But then Option 2 was "object to the decision, which a lawyer advised against as the sum could have soared to £80,000."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2025/jul/22/surrey-chippie-owner-given-devastating-home-office-fine-for-allegedly-illegal-hire-immigration
https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/passport-help/faqs.html#card
https://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/19417/local-council-elections-24th-july?page=1
"Kemi Adegoke’s experience was made all the harder because she had a certain idea of Britain. She read Enid Blyton novels as a child. Blyton’s stories are heady patriotic fantasies that portray an unchanging England of rock cakes and cucumber sandwiches. Blytonland, if it ever existed, was already crumbling when Adegoke imaginatively entered it in the Eighties. By 2005 it had all but disappeared.
...................................................................................................................................................................
The Conservatives lived up to Badenoch’s Blytonland idea of Britain when the rest of the country did not. It was still old-fashioned and hierarchical. These were her tribe: like her father they wanted things to be “done properly”. The Conservative Party allowed her to transform from outsider to insider and to wield the power her father never achieved in his own career in Nigeria. Politics let her be a somebody in a country where many immigrants are ignored, looked down upon or even despised. The Conservative Party was the means of her ascent. The modernisers who met Adegoke saw in her the spirit of the times, the essence of 2005. As one of them told me: “She was new Britain.”
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk-politics/2025/07/kemi-badenoch-isnt-working
https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/allies-and-morrison-reveals-plan-to-pedestrianise-londons-west-end
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnq-kVkZLFQ
(I think the closest comparison I can think of is probably what has been changed in the Aldwych.)
It would have concentrated the minds of the Leavers as to what exact form of Brexit they wanted, and killed off any hope for the Remainers of de-railing Brexit entirely, making them engage with the Brexit process too.
HYUFD says Stride anyway.
All employers should be doing these checks already. If you employ someone without verification and they don’t have the right to work, you are on the hook for £45k.
https://www.gov.uk/prove-right-to-work
On ID cards, one suggestion is an id in the form of words. Easy enough, if properly done, to include a check sum.
I suspect the World credit crisis of 2008, austerity, burgeoning social media, Brexit, the Boriswave, Boris Johnson and Covid, Liz Truss, Paul Marshall and the notion that no one needs pay taxes but services should remain as they are or improve has flushed 2005 away forever.
Maybe Wayne Larkins who we were talking about a couple of weeks ago.
For England it is 11 years (Gareth Batty).
https://www.waterstones.com/book/between-the-waves/tom-mctague/9781529083095
It’s why i now have zero tolerance for those who complain about digital ID because they are very much “I’m alright, Jack - so I don’t see the issue”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/sport/35974972/graham-thorpe-wife-plea-end-life/
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/35968035/howard-phillips-jail-grant-shapps-russian-agents/
Grant Shapps will be mortified to learn he is not famous enough to be named in the headline.
How to make London great again, according to 10 of our writers
With the city struggling to attract tourists compared with its European rivals, these suggestions could help end the malaise
..
1. Pedestrianise the West End
Isn’t the answer staring us in the face? It’s time London stopped dilly-dallying and fully pedestrianised not just Oxford Street, but the whole of the West End.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/destinations/europe/united-kingdom/england/london/make-london-great-again/
view.code.apple.rabbit.square
Three lists of 1000 words each would give you a billion possibles, the last two words form a checksum.
NEW THREAD
Instead there was a vacuum, "Brexit means Brexit," which was filled by the extremes on both sides.
You could just as well say the Just William Books are outdated, or Treasure Island, or Robinson Crusoe. That does not mean they, like Enid Blyton do not have something worth reading.
With adult fiction when I was a kid they were sniffy about Agatha Christie but just see the number of TV adaptions, most of which only work because they simplify the stories within the books themselves.
Flavour of the month when I was a teenager was "Lord of the Flies", it was my set book at O' Level. Looking back I think of the wise words of Dorothy Parker, this is not a book to be cast aside lightly - it should be flung with the greatest violence you can muster against the nearest wall !
I bet the author of the New Stateman piece loved Lord of the Flies. Vile book, vile person.