@stodge - as always - raises another very important point.
If granny* is not in a care home, then someone is going to be looking after her. And if it's not the state, then it's likely to be somebody of working age. In which case, we're stuffing the dependeny ratio again... just in a different way.
* Assuming she has dementia or is otherwise unable to look after herself.
Why is a boat housing asylum seekers in Weymouth any different to a hotel housing asylum seekers in Weymouth except for being much more expensive (£6,000 per month per resident)
Easier to control. Also better value for money, according to the last Government. Plus it's not in Weymouth city centre. Or rather wasn't. Edit: it was in the Portland Harbour complex.
Yes, I know it was in Portland, which is next to Weymouth. I don't think there are any hotels used for asylum seekers in Portland though. More control? No, it might have looked like a prison but it wasn't one, residents were allowed to come and go as they pleased on the same basis as hotel accommodation. And it wasn't better value for money, the original plans by the government did promise it would be cheaper, but costs were more and occupancy less than expected. Here's a link to the National Audit Office report from March 2024. https://www.nao.org.uk/press-releases/alternative-asylum-accommodation-will-cost-more-than-hotels/
Channel 4 Going Inside 10 Downing Street In Steven Moffat Drama
Sherlock writer Steven Moffat is opening the doors to 10 Downing Street in a drama for Channel 4.
The UK’s most famous residency will be the subject of Number 10, which comes from Moffat’s ITV Studios-owned production house, Hartswood Films.
The show is, in effect, an Upstairs Downstairs-style drama looking to the activities of many people inside the property, which houses the British Prime Minister and their family during their terms. Politics will be put to aside as Moffat focuses on the fictional personalities that make up the home.
Per the synopsis: “10 Downing Street. There’s a Prime Minister in the attic, a coffee bar in the basement, and a wallpapered labyrinth of romance, crisis and heartbreak in-between. Set in the only terrace house in history with mice and a nuclear deterrent, it’s the only knock-through in the world where a hangover can start a war.
“The government will be fictional, but the problems will be real. We’ll never know which party is in power, because once the whole world hits the fan it barely matters. This is a show about the building and everyone inside. Not just the Prime Minister upstairs, but the conspiracy theorist who runs the cafe three floors below, the man who repairs the lift that never works, the madly ambitious ‘advisors’ fighting for office space in cupboards. Oh, and of course, the cat.”
The ending will take place before the beginning, the lead-up will be brilliant and the last episode will be disappointing, there will be a tragicomic married/divorcing couple, there will be a gay Anglican priest, the female roles will be underwritten and tend to hero-worship if not a villain, and if he's running another series simultaneously both will have a drop in quality. At one point the hero will lie and this will be instantly forgiven.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
How do you stop them running away?
Desertion is a pretty serious offense.
How about. - Anyone who attempts to enter the U.K. by sea, illegally, is deemed to have enlisted in the Royal Navy.
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
How do you stop them running away?
Desertion is a pretty serious offense.
How about. - Anyone who attempts to enter the U.K. by sea, illegally, is deemed to have enlisted in the Royal Navy.
The key to social care was set out in the Dilnot report on Social care as long ago as 2011. We need the elderly to pay a lot more of their care. The idea that the inheritance for the family is more important than the cost to the taxpayer is simply not sustainable nor even remotely equitable. Taxpayers with no aspirations of money for themselves are paying higher taxes on their income to subsidise wealth for the privileged. It is outrageous. Theresa May wasn't right about much but she was right about this and the British people were delusional in rejecting her solutions.
If we are more aggressive about prioritising the debts of the elderly over the inheritance they leave we can save ourselves at least £10bn a year now and more going forward. It would not solve our deficit, that is on a truly different and frightening scale, but it would be a significant step in the right direction for once. Carpe diem.
This is one option that puts the cost of care substantially onto those that lose the end of life lottery, who have illnesses that require lots of expensive care.
There is another option where the cost of end of life care is funded by everyone through compulsory insurance or taxes, whether they ultimately need it or not.
Either of these is better than an unmanaged ad-hoc as we have now.
Compulsory insurance is another moral hazard. Why look after your old Dad if the state will do it for free, and he's already paid for it?
Without the army of family carers out there the government would have an even bigger problem.
I wouldn't be so defeatist about old age.
I have just spent the day taking my mum for a hospital appointment. She is 88, while my dad is 90. She struggles to walk more than 100 yards due to arthritis (she played tennis every week until she was 80 and it has finally caught up with her knees) while my dad can no longer drive because of his eyes. It all went well, the clinical service being excellent even if the Salisbury District Hospital is mostly portakabins, with long desolate corridors of derelict equipment. They have no external help apart me and my brothers dropping by every few weeks.
I dropped them off at their house after a pub lunch. I think there are several key factors to living well in old age.
1: good genes. The hand of cards we get at birth is critical in many ways 2: healthy eating, not much booze. 3: plenty of mental activity. My mum reads extensively, both play bridge weekly. 4: downsize to a manageable property no later than mid seventies, preferably somewhere where driving isn't critical. 5: stay married. Company is critical, both for mental stimulation, and for managing daily activities.
We should aim not at funding Social Care, but rather at avoiding it. Healthy lives, good access to timely healthcare, enough flexible working for family members in their fifties that they can help (my brothers are well aware that we will be doing much more as time goes on).
This isn't aimed at preserving our inheritance but rather at ensuring our parents enjoy life as much as possible. Social Care is sometimes the only way, but putting it off as far as possible should be our real aim.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
How do you stop them running away?
Desertion is a pretty serious offense.
How about. - Anyone who attempts to enter the U.K. by sea, illegally, is deemed to have enlisted in the Royal Navy.
Why is a boat housing asylum seekers in Weymouth any different to a hotel housing asylum seekers in Weymouth except for being much more expensive (£6,000 per month per resident)
Easier to control. Also better value for money, according to the last Government. Plus it's not in Weymouth city centre. Or rather wasn't. Edit: it was in the Portland Harbour complex.
how the feck can it cost £6K a month, be cheaper putting them in the Queen Mary
Why is a boat housing asylum seekers in Weymouth any different to a hotel housing asylum seekers in Weymouth except for being much more expensive (£6,000 per month per resident)
Easier to control. Also better value for money, according to the last Government. Plus it's not in Weymouth city centre. Or rather wasn't. Edit: it was in the Portland Harbour complex.
how the feck can it cost £6K a month, be cheaper putting them in the Queen Mary
That's averaged out, and if some of the rooms are empty then the average gets bumped up. If occupancy was only half then the truye cost for 100% occupancy would be something like £100 for everything, incl. food, plus security, medics, etc.
@stodge - as always - raises another very important point.
If granny* is not in a care home, then someone is going to be looking after her. And if it's not the state, then it's likely to be somebody of working age. In which case, we're stuffing the dependeny ratio again... just in a different way.
* Assuming she has dementia or is otherwise unable to look after herself.
Again in my experience, Granny is often cared for by Grandpa, or vice versa. Working age people pop in at intervals, whether family or state. I myself (then working full time) helped my father care for my mother, then had to stop work (=retire early) to care for my father.
Why is a boat housing asylum seekers in Weymouth any different to a hotel housing asylum seekers in Weymouth except for being much more expensive (£6,000 per month per resident)
Easier to control. Also better value for money, according to the last Government. Plus it's not in Weymouth city centre. Or rather wasn't. Edit: it was in the Portland Harbour complex.
how the feck can it cost £6K a month, be cheaper putting them in the Queen Mary
Because the government (of all stripes) just bends over to any private contractor and pays whatever the quote is. No-one ever gets fired for being inadequate because they will have been promoted by the time the bills come in.
Councils are spending an average of £2 in every £5 on staff pensions and debt interest payments before a penny is allocated to essential services.
Some 18pc of council tax revenue is used to service the cost of huge loans taken out over the last decade, as local authorities struggle to cut costs and face greater demand for services. Staff pension contributions account for a further 23pc of revenues on average, meaning that 41pc is swallowed up before any money is spent on core services
Add in the massive increase in SEND cost to councils over the past 5-10 years. No wonder they are all busto.
Councils have defined benefit scheme pensions. But they also have pension funds designed to cover these. (I used to manage some of the equities for a West of England county council.) Now, I'm sure they're underfunded*, but at the same time, I suspect the two pounds out of every five ignores the investment income from pension funds.
* Some will be more underfunded than others, of course
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Some countries, I think Austria is one, had no alternative for gas at the beginning of the war, especially when they are landlocked. But that does not excuse them not having worked harder to massively reduce that dependence, if not totally stop it. But AFAIAA that would involve building new pipelines, which is not quick, easy or inexpensive.
Other countries are importing Russian oil and/or gas (LNG) with very little excuse aside from blatant financial self-interest.
Why is a boat housing asylum seekers in Weymouth any different to a hotel housing asylum seekers in Weymouth except for being much more expensive (£6,000 per month per resident)
Easier to control. Also better value for money, according to the last Government. Plus it's not in Weymouth city centre. Or rather wasn't. Edit: it was in the Portland Harbour complex.
Yes, I know it was in Portland, which is next to Weymouth. I don't think there are any hotels used for asylum seekers in Portland though. More control? No, it might have looked like a prison but it wasn't one, residents were allowed to come and go as they pleased on the same basis as hotel accommodation. And it wasn't better value for money, the original plans by the government did promise it would be cheaper, but costs were more and occupancy less than expected. Here's a link to the National Audit Office report from March 2024. https://www.nao.org.uk/press-releases/alternative-asylum-accommodation-will-cost-more-than-hotels/
Still: better control - and more of it if needed. Not easy going through a hole in the back fence without a rowing boat. And the point is it wasn't in central Weymouth.
There are hotel(s) in Portland too but the barge was shoved out on the maritime equivalent of an industrial estate. And the per diem would have been much better if the HO had been more efficient with the occupancy.
Whatever one thinks of the basic notion of housing rather than processing the denizens, one can see that the idea did have a certain logic at the time.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
I forgot that Russia borders Hungary.
The oil comes via the Druzhba pipeline that runs through... Belarus and Ukraine. It doesn't pass through the EU at any point.
I was told by somebody in the know the Zuck had got increasingly grumpy about performance of their AI models and is constantly on the staff backs about why not doing better on such and such benchmark like the other AI labs.
It sounded all a bit Gavin Belson in Silicon Valley TV show.
Or Zuck and his team have realised the Bubble is real, and are looking at ways of reducing their exposure when it pops...
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
Ukraine can blow up more pipelines, EU can bring in rules etc on sanctions and anyone breaking them gets chucked out.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
I was told by somebody in the know the Zuck had got increasingly grumpy about performance of their AI models and is constantly on the staff backs about why not doing better on such and such benchmark like the other AI labs.
It sounded all a bit Gavin Belson in Silicon Valley TV show.
Or Zuck and his team have realised the Bubble is real, and are looking at ways of reducing their exposure when it pops...
I was told, he is absolutely going mental about them under performing. As for he thinks the bubble is popping, bit odd to be going around offering people footballer money with $100m's long term deals to join. Somebody was reportedly offered a $1bn contract recently. They also recently spent $15bn on scale.ai
I was told by somebody in the know the Zuck had got increasingly grumpy about performance of their AI models and is constantly on the staff backs about why not doing better on such and such benchmark like the other AI labs.
It sounded all a bit Gavin Belson in Silicon Valley TV show.
Or Zuck and his team have realised the Bubble is real, and are looking at ways of reducing their exposure when it pops...
I was told, he is absolutely going mental about them under performing. As for he thinks the bubble is popping, bit odd to be going around offering people footballer money with $100m's deals to join.
Ah, was it META doing those insane job offers. I get these chancers confused...
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
Well Ukraine did a pretty good job of that the other night. There’s no longer a functioning pipeline to Hungary.
@stodge - as always - raises another very important point.
If granny* is not in a care home, then someone is going to be looking after her. And if it's not the state, then it's likely to be somebody of working age. In which case, we're stuffing the dependeny ratio again... just in a different way.
* Assuming she has dementia or is otherwise unable to look after herself.
Again in my experience, Granny is often cared for by Grandpa, or vice versa. Working age people pop in at intervals, whether family or state. I myself (then working full time) helped my father care for my mother, then had to stop work (=retire early) to care for my father.
My mother (OGH's wife) has fairly advanced dementia. But she had always been absolutely insistent that she would not be moved to a home.
OGH did all the caring for a long while. But now his mobility is not good, and so we have live in care. My sister has also given up her job so as to help support my mother.
So, sure, spouses play a significant role. But spouses can't always keep providing needed care forever.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
Trade is an EU competency. If the EU can't ban Russian imports when it is purporting to help Ukraine fight a war against Russia, then what is the point of the EU?
The other aspect of care for the elderly is the greater proportion of that care that happens outside residential facilities. You have various levels of domiciliary care and the one area not discussed too often is the role of care within the family.
We know there are 6.5 million carers in the UK.
3 million people combine caring for a loved one with paid work. Every year, over 2 million people become carers, some overnight, some more gradually – so there is a new population of carers in the workforce every day. Carers make up 11% of the total UK workforce, 1 in every 9 employees. Eight out of ten carers are of working age, ie between 16 and 65. 90% of working carers are aged 30+ – in their prime employment years. In 2019 Carers UK released research that suggests figures have increased significantly since the 2011 census. The Juggling work and care report found that there are around 4.87 million people in the UK combining work and caring responsibilities, compared with the 3 million in the census 2011. This is 1 in 7 of all workers, compared with the previous figures of 1 in 9 workers.
This is caring for both adults and children to be fair but still a far from insignificant number. Many would like, I believe, to be productive members of society and both work and provide care.
The people working in the care sector are extremely productive members of society, unless you are the sort of sad person who values landlords and City money movers as more productive than those who make other humans’ lives better.
You misunderstand - I'm not just talking about those who work in the care sector - I'm referring to those who provide unpaid care in the family whether for children, parents or grandparents. In many ways, the notion of caring for elderly relatives within the family was how society used to operate.
For many families, the expectation remains parents will care for children, children will care for parents and youn get large multi-generational families all in the same dwelling (or dwellings). Our more fractured and fragmented family environment these days means there is more reliance on paid for facilities where older relatives can receive care.
There's also the thorny issue of dementia care which is often beyond even the most dedicated individual. Specialist dementia care facilities are among the most expensive in the care sector.
I think that Davey has been particularly strong on issues around unpaid carers.
Sure, not everyone is in a position to either receive of give unpaid care, but facilitating it for people who do is both compassionate and also good financially. Most of us are very happy to look after elderly relatives, repaying in small part the care they gave to us when we were young. Doing so also keeps the financial burden of Social Care off the local authority and national budgets. Being a more caring society in this makes great financial sense.
Why is a boat housing asylum seekers in Weymouth any different to a hotel housing asylum seekers in Weymouth except for being much more expensive (£6,000 per month per resident)
Easier to control. Also better value for money, according to the last Government. Plus it's not in Weymouth city centre. Or rather wasn't. Edit: it was in the Portland Harbour complex.
Yes, I know it was in Portland, which is next to Weymouth. I don't think there are any hotels used for asylum seekers in Portland though. More control? No, it might have looked like a prison but it wasn't one, residents were allowed to come and go as they pleased on the same basis as hotel accommodation. And it wasn't better value for money, the original plans by the government did promise it would be cheaper, but costs were more and occupancy less than expected. Here's a link to the National Audit Office report from March 2024. https://www.nao.org.uk/press-releases/alternative-asylum-accommodation-will-cost-more-than-hotels/
Still: better control - and more of it if needed. Not easy going through a hole in the back fence without a rowing boat. And the point is it wasn't in central Weymouth.
There are hotel(s) in Portland too but the barge was shoved out on the maritime equivalent of an industrial estate. And the per diem would have been much better if the HO had been more efficient with the occupancy.
Whatever one thinks of the basic notion of housing rather than processing the denizens, one can see that the idea did have a certain logic at the time.
How do you get the better control idea? also as the NAO report states, it was projected to cost £34.8m over 2023/24 and 2024/25, over 440 maximum capacity that's still £3,300/month. That is better than the hotel costs that are reported at £3,615 per resident per month but remember that the hotels won't be at 100% occupancy either so to be fair you will have to calculate the hotel cost by maximum occupancy as well.
I was told by somebody in the know the Zuck had got increasingly grumpy about performance of their AI models and is constantly on the staff backs about why not doing better on such and such benchmark like the other AI labs.
It sounded all a bit Gavin Belson in Silicon Valley TV show.
Or Zuck and his team have realised the Bubble is real, and are looking at ways of reducing their exposure when it pops...
I was told, he is absolutely going mental about them under performing. As for he thinks the bubble is popping, bit odd to be going around offering people footballer money with $100m's long term deals to join. Somebody was reportedly offered a $1bn contract recently. They also recently spent $15bn on scale.ai
I wonder if it's a combination of their models not being good and the fact that LLMs appear to be reaching a plateau of performance...
Ed Davey says that calling Palestine Action terrorists is wrong. Good.
Ed Davey brings the LDs back to their normal lunacy.
The lunacy is that some five year old civil servant could draft a regulation so badly written that even someone with a watermelon sign might be prosecuted. I hold no brief for PA, and clearly the attacks on Brize Norton were probably Russian inspired, but the idea that a bunch of Quakers and worthy peaceniks are basically the same as Al Qaida is clearly stupid.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Some countries, I think Austria is one, had no alternative for gas at the beginning of the war, especially when they are landlocked. But that does not excuse them not having worked harder to massively reduce that dependence, if not totally stop it. But AFAIAA that would involve building new pipelines, which is not quick, easy or inexpensive.
Other countries are importing Russian oil and/or gas (LNG) with very little excuse aside from blatant financial self-interest.
Ukraine is doing a good job of showing the insecurity of that supply. Anyone continuing to do so has only themselves to blame if the supply ends mid-winter.
Ed Davey says that calling Palestine Action terrorists is wrong. Good.
Ed Davey brings the LDs back to their normal lunacy.
The lunacy is that some five year old civil servant could draft a regulation so badly written that even someone with a watermelon sign might be prosecuted. I hold no brief for PA, and clearly the attacks on Brize Norton were probably Russian inspired, but the idea that a bunch of Quakers and worthy peaceniks are basically the same as Al Qaida is clearly stupid.
They’re not saying they’re the same Al Qaeda, they’re saying they’re the same as people who support Al Qaeda.
They protested. They were smeared. But they have won.
The solution, however, cannot be to move the illegal migrants and force them on another community.
This has gone on far too long. The country is well past breaking point. The last Government didn’t listen and failed. Starmer’s making it even worse.
Change the laws. Get third country deals. Deport everyone who’s come here illegally. End this.
Christ give over.
Well past breaking point. What a load of catsastrophising bullshit.
There were 108000 asylum applications last year. If it were 10800 no one except obsessives would care. If it were 1080000 most everyone would say we were past breaking point - maybe even you. So it's all about the numbers.
What do we have in place as legal and practical structures if we get to 216000, 432000 and so on? Nothing. Only quantity is saving us.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
The only thing you need to think here is compared to what? Current or past government? Do me a favour!
So Reform is so much Astroturf that they can only find neo-fascist retreads to be their candidates, never mind ministers.
A 30% chance of being the next government, you say? Has no one here actually studied British History or Politics? The past is littered with sure fire new things that crashed and burned, from the New Party, the BUF or the National Front to Change UK. There is a far better chance than 30% that "Reform" will indeed crash and burn.
Connoisseurs of the genre of manipulative people who get through innumerable lawyers dealing with Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) would enjoy this recent exhaustive and exhausting judgment about someone who could give even Marten lessons in time wasting complexification and how it is done, though not in how to succeed.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Some countries, I think Austria is one, had no alternative for gas at the beginning of the war, especially when they are landlocked. But that does not excuse them not having worked harder to massively reduce that dependence, if not totally stop it. But AFAIAA that would involve building new pipelines, which is not quick, easy or inexpensive.
Other countries are importing Russian oil and/or gas (LNG) with very little excuse aside from blatant financial self-interest.
Ukraine is doing a good job of showing the insecurity of that supply. Anyone continuing to do so has only themselves to blame if the supply ends mid-winter.
Yet Ukraine allows the oil to pass through, and pockets the fees. Gas too, until the beginning of this year.
The top EU importers of Russian fossil fuels are Hungary, France and Slovakia, apparently.
Anyway, the total aid from EU countries to Ukraine will be much higher than the figure given above.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
The only thing you need to think here is compared to what? Current or past government? Do me a favour!
So Reform is so much Astroturf that they can only find neo-fascist retreads to be their candidates, never mind ministers.
A 30% chance of being the next government, you say? Has no one here actually studied British History or Politics? The past is littered with sure fire new things that crashed and burned, from the New Party, the BUF or the National Front to Change UK. There is a far better chance than 30% that "Reform" will indeed crash and burn.
At this point there is probably both a 30% chance of Reform being the next government and a 30% chance of Reform crashing and burning
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
Trade is an EU competency. If the EU can't ban Russian imports when it is purporting to help Ukraine fight a war against Russia, then what is the point of the EU?
Hungary got itself an optout in return for not vetoing sanctions
However can’t the pro asylum seeker Labour and Lib Dem run councils, some of whom are ‘cities of sanctuary’ simply approve a change of use for the hotel to allow the asylum seekers to come to their areas ?
To claim universal credit you have to be actively seeking work and cannot turn down a job offer. The UK minimum wage is also now higher than ever at over £20,000 a year.
So there should be plenty of incentive for UK unemployed to take care home jobs now not just migrants, especially is there are now more out of work than there are job vacancies here. We should also follow the Japanese model of funding social care with insurance
To claim universal credit you have to be actively seeking work and cannot turn down a job offer. The UK minimum wage is also now higher than ever at over £20,000 a year.
So there should be plenty of incentive for UK unemployed to take care home jobs now not just migrants, especially is there are now more out of work than there are job vacancies here. We should also follow the Japanese model of funding social care with insurance
Not so. There are around 3.4 million UC claimants who do. It need to work.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
I would like to see a breakdown of the €21.9 billion by country, to see how much is exported to Hungary.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
No, they don’t. Almost nobody with serious policy, governance, or academic experience campaigns for Reform. The closest would be Anne Widdecombe and Jake Berry.
I wouldn’t focus on the career politicians. I have heard of some truly excellent people in industry being quietly approached to assist with policy creation. The sell is that they are almost certainly going to gain power and it’s a crucial period for the country to arrest its decline. Will be fascinating to see if this gets traction or not.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
The only thing you need to think here is compared to what? Current or past government? Do me a favour!
So Reform is so much Astroturf that they can only find neo-fascist retreads to be their candidates, never mind ministers.
A 30% chance of being the next government, you say? Has no one here actually studied British History or Politics? The past is littered with sure fire new things that crashed and burned, from the New Party, the BUF or the National Front to Change UK. There is a far better chance than 30% that "Reform" will indeed crash and burn.
Thanks. William Hills give 9/4 odds for a Reform majority at the next election. This, if I understand the stuff correctly implies a probability of 30%. (Correct me if I am wrong). To this of course should the added the non negligible chance of a Reform led government with fewer than 325 seats. I shall look forward to the Reform/SNP/Islamic League/Corbyistasultana alliance.
A number of PB posters seem to think that Reform's chances at the next election are roughly 100%. I disagree.
There is money to be made if one can get this right!
But maths and betting wise, there must be separated out rigidly the maths of Will Reform Win the Nest Election and the maths of Can They Be Any Good At Governing As They Are Fantasising Loonies.
Maths is a severe discipline. It is perfectly possible that there is a 30% chance of a Reform majority government AND a 30%+ chance that they will crash and burn, as together they come it at under 100. But the funny thing about probabilities is that in the end only one horse wins the race.
I still think that Labour majority is the favourite for 2029. On PB this view is met with howls of derision.
@stodge - as always - raises another very important point.
If granny* is not in a care home, then someone is going to be looking after her. And if it's not the state, then it's likely to be somebody of working age. In which case, we're stuffing the dependeny ratio again... just in a different way.
* Assuming she has dementia or is otherwise unable to look after herself.
Again in my experience, Granny is often cared for by Grandpa, or vice versa. Working age people pop in at intervals, whether family or state. I myself (then working full time) helped my father care for my mother, then had to stop work (=retire early) to care for my father.
My mother (OGH's wife) has fairly advanced dementia. But she had always been absolutely insistent that she would not be moved to a home.
OGH did all the caring for a long while. But now his mobility is not good, and so we have live in care. My sister has also given up her job so as to help support my mother.
So, sure, spouses play a significant role. But spouses can't always keep providing needed care forever.
The Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) will propose reducing the number of professional sides in Wales from four to two.
Welsh rugby's governing body has produced a radical plan which includes its "optimal solution" for transforming the struggling game.
Cardiff and Swansea presumably.
You'd think they'd never heard of Scottish association football.
Scottish professional Rugby would also be better if there were more teams than just Glasgow and Edinburgh, and if there was an intermediate level between the two professional teams and the amateur leagues. I assume there is the same gap between levels in Welsh rugby.
To claim universal credit you have to be actively seeking work and cannot turn down a job offer. The UK minimum wage is also now higher than ever at over £20,000 a year.
So there should be plenty of incentive for UK unemployed to take care home jobs now not just migrants, especially is there are now more out of work than there are job vacancies here. We should also follow the Japanese model of funding social care with insurance
Not so. There are around 3.4 million UC claimants who do. It need to work.
I concur your final sentence.
And how many of them are in any fit state to work?
How many of them would you want caring for your elderly rellies?
I don't know what the number of British people who shouldn't be working at all is, but it's somewhere higher than zero.
The Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) will propose reducing the number of professional sides in Wales from four to two.
Welsh rugby's governing body has produced a radical plan which includes its "optimal solution" for transforming the struggling game.
Cardiff and Swansea presumably.
You'd think they'd never heard of Scottish association football.
Scottish football has a different problem. The Glasgow based authorities have geared the system to benefit two professional clubs to the detriment of all the other professional clubs.
Why is a boat housing asylum seekers in Weymouth any different to a hotel housing asylum seekers in Weymouth except for being much more expensive (£6,000 per month per resident)
Easier to control. Also better value for money, according to the last Government. Plus it's not in Weymouth city centre. Or rather wasn't. Edit: it was in the Portland Harbour complex.
how the feck can it cost £6K a month, be cheaper putting them in the Queen Mary
Or Buckingham Palace, Sandringham, Windsor, Balmoral, etc.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
No, they don’t. Almost nobody with serious policy, governance, or academic experience campaigns for Reform. The closest would be Anne Widdecombe and Jake Berry.
I wouldn’t focus on the career politicians. I have heard of some truly excellent people in industry being quietly approached to assist with policy creation. The sell is that they are almost certainly going to gain power and it’s a crucial period for the country to arrest its decline. Will be fascinating to see if this gets traction or not.
Business is a very different skill set to politics.
But even if policy creation is genuinely competent, getting it through a rabble of xenophobes, anti-vaxxer, science-denying crackpots is a different matter, and that is what the Reform Parliament will be like.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
No, they don’t. Almost nobody with serious policy, governance, or academic experience campaigns for Reform. The closest would be Anne Widdecombe and Jake Berry.
I wouldn’t focus on the career politicians. I have heard of some truly excellent people in industry being quietly approached to assist with policy creation. The sell is that they are almost certainly going to gain power and it’s a crucial period for the country to arrest its decline. Will be fascinating to see if this gets traction or not.
That may be so - and if it is it seems to be good news, but the problems that a government faces are not those of industry. You need someone fully involved. You need them to have their career on the line.
I am nearly sure that Reform will make the most awful of governments should we unwisely elect them.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
The only thing you need to think here is compared to what? Current or past government? Do me a favour!
So Reform is so much Astroturf that they can only find neo-fascist retreads to be their candidates, never mind ministers.
A 30% chance of being the next government, you say? Has no one here actually studied British History or Politics? The past is littered with sure fire new things that crashed and burned, from the New Party, the BUF or the National Front to Change UK. There is a far better chance than 30% that "Reform" will indeed crash and burn.
Thanks. William Hills give 9/4 odds for a Reform majority at the next election. This, if I understand the stuff correctly implies a probability of 30%. (Correct me if I am wrong). To this of course should the added the non negligible chance of a Reform led government with fewer than 325 seats. I shall look forward to the Reform/SNP/Islamic League/Corbyistasultana alliance.
A number of PB posters seem to think that Reform's chances at the next election are roughly 100%. I disagree.
There is money to be made if one can get this right!
But maths and betting wise, there must be separated out rigidly the maths of Will Reform Win the Nest Election and the maths of Can They Be Any Good At Governing As They Are Fantasising Loonies.
Maths is a severe discipline. It is perfectly possible that there is a 30% chance of a Reform majority government AND a 30%+ chance that they will crash and burn, as together they come it at under 100. But the funny thing about probabilities is that in the end only one horse wins the race.
I still think that Labour majority is the favourite for 2029. On PB this view is met with howls of derision.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
I would like to see a breakdown of the €21.9 billion by country, to see how much is exported to Hungary.
The energy sanctions have always been performative. The UK has continued to import plenty of Urals crude, dressed up as “Indian diesel”, much of it even refined in Russian state owned refineries geographically located in India. It made me so cross for such a long time that my thicko MP lacked the intellect to understand what I was saying. Luckily the dirty sod stood down last year before he lost his seat.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
No, they don’t. Almost nobody with serious policy, governance, or academic experience campaigns for Reform. The closest would be Anne Widdecombe and Jake Berry.
I wouldn’t focus on the career politicians. I have heard of some truly excellent people in industry being quietly approached to assist with policy creation. The sell is that they are almost certainly going to gain power and it’s a crucial period for the country to arrest its decline. Will be fascinating to see if this gets traction or not.
That may be so - and if it is it seems to be good news, but the problems that a government faces are not those of industry. You need someone fully involved. You need them to have their career on the line.
I am nearly sure that Reform will make the most awful of governments should we unwisely elect them.
They are bound to fill the benches with a high number of pirates and bandits. So no different to what we have been treated to by the Big 2 then.
To claim universal credit you have to be actively seeking work and cannot turn down a job offer. The UK minimum wage is also now higher than ever at over £20,000 a year.
So there should be plenty of incentive for UK unemployed to take care home jobs now not just migrants, especially is there are now more out of work than there are job vacancies here. We should also follow the Japanese model of funding social care with insurance
Not so. There are around 3.4 million UC claimants who do. It need to work.
I concur your final sentence.
And how many of them are in any fit state to work?
How many of them would you want caring for your elderly rellies?
I don't know what the number of British people who shouldn't be working at all is, but it's somewhere higher than zero.
Don’t argue the toss with me over this. I’m just correcting HYUFD who said that to claim UC you need to be actively seeking work.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
No, they don’t. Almost nobody with serious policy, governance, or academic experience campaigns for Reform. The closest would be Anne Widdecombe and Jake Berry.
I wouldn’t focus on the career politicians. I have heard of some truly excellent people in industry being quietly approached to assist with policy creation. The sell is that they are almost certainly going to gain power and it’s a crucial period for the country to arrest its decline. Will be fascinating to see if this gets traction or not.
That may be so - and if it is it seems to be good news, but the problems that a government faces are not those of industry. You need someone fully involved. You need them to have their career on the line.
I am nearly sure that Reform will make the most awful of governments should we unwisely elect them.
They are bound to fill the benches with a high number of pirates and bandits. So no different to what we have been treated to by the Big 2 then.
"The Pirate Code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules!"
To claim universal credit you have to be actively seeking work and cannot turn down a job offer. The UK minimum wage is also now higher than ever at over £20,000 a year.
So there should be plenty of incentive for UK unemployed to take care home jobs now not just migrants, especially is there are now more out of work than there are job vacancies here. We should also follow the Japanese model of funding social care with insurance
Not so. There are around 3.4 million UC claimants who do. It need to work.
I concur your final sentence.
And how many of them are in any fit state to work?
How many of them would you want caring for your elderly rellies?
I don't know what the number of British people who shouldn't be working at all is, but it's somewhere higher than zero.
Don’t argue the toss with me over this. I’m just correcting HYUFD who said that to claim UC you need to be actively seeking work.
@stodge - as always - raises another very important point.
If granny* is not in a care home, then someone is going to be looking after her. And if it's not the state, then it's likely to be somebody of working age. In which case, we're stuffing the dependeny ratio again... just in a different way.
* Assuming she has dementia or is otherwise unable to look after herself.
Again in my experience, Granny is often cared for by Grandpa, or vice versa. Working age people pop in at intervals, whether family or state. I myself (then working full time) helped my father care for my mother, then had to stop work (=retire early) to care for my father.
My mother (OGH's wife) has fairly advanced dementia. But she had always been absolutely insistent that she would not be moved to a home.
OGH did all the caring for a long while. But now his mobility is not good, and so we have live in care. My sister has also given up her job so as to help support my mother.
So, sure, spouses play a significant role. But spouses can't always keep providing needed care forever.
Sorry to hear about your mother. I hope your father isn’t trying to do too much, and is well enough to keep up with PB. We owe him a big debt of gratitude.
To claim universal credit you have to be actively seeking work and cannot turn down a job offer. The UK minimum wage is also now higher than ever at over £20,000 a year.
So there should be plenty of incentive for UK unemployed to take care home jobs now not just migrants, especially is there are now more out of work than there are job vacancies here. We should also follow the Japanese model of funding social care with insurance
Not so. There are around 3.4 million UC claimants who do. It need to work.
I concur your final sentence.
And how many of them are in any fit state to work?
How many of them would you want caring for your elderly rellies?
I don't know what the number of British people who shouldn't be working at all is, but it's somewhere higher than zero.
Don’t argue the toss with me over this. I’m just correcting HYUFD who said that to claim UC you need to be actively seeking work.
That’s not the case.
If you are out of work and claiming UC and not so disabled you can't work you have to be seeking work actively or you can be sanctioned and lose your UC
The sellers having made a five hundred percent profit on their home after 25 years coughing up would be more equitable than the poor old buyer having to front stamp duty at purchase.
To claim universal credit you have to be actively seeking work and cannot turn down a job offer. The UK minimum wage is also now higher than ever at over £20,000 a year.
So there should be plenty of incentive for UK unemployed to take care home jobs now not just migrants, especially is there are now more out of work than there are job vacancies here. We should also follow the Japanese model of funding social care with insurance
Not so. There are around 3.4 million UC claimants who do. It need to work.
I concur your final sentence.
And how many of them are in any fit state to work?
How many of them would you want caring for your elderly rellies?
I don't know what the number of British people who shouldn't be working at all is, but it's somewhere higher than zero.
Don’t argue the toss with me over this. I’m just correcting HYUFD who said that to claim UC you need to be actively seeking work.
That’s not the case.
I thought that was JSA?
JSA is now only for those who have made enough NI contributions and can only be claimed for 6 months
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
How do you stop them running away?
That’s what the fence is for.
I believe the standard way to prevent aliens accessing a secure location is this:
They protested. They were smeared. But they have won.
The solution, however, cannot be to move the illegal migrants and force them on another community.
This has gone on far too long. The country is well past breaking point. The last Government didn’t listen and failed. Starmer’s making it even worse.
Change the laws. Get third country deals. Deport everyone who’s come here illegally. End this.
I’m pleased but not surprised that HYUFD has kept well clear of the unedifying Epping hotel saga. He has more class than some on here.
It was a good result for DC and a solid judgement from Judge Eyre (once a Tory candidate in Stourbridge in 2001) but yes some of the far right element in the protests has been unsavoury
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
No, they don’t. Almost nobody with serious policy, governance, or academic experience campaigns for Reform. The closest would be Anne Widdecombe and Jake Berry.
I wouldn’t focus on the career politicians. I have heard of some truly excellent people in industry being quietly approached to assist with policy creation. The sell is that they are almost certainly going to gain power and it’s a crucial period for the country to arrest its decline. Will be fascinating to see if this gets traction or not.
Business is a very different skill set to politics.
But even if policy creation is genuinely competent, getting it through a rabble of xenophobes, anti-vaxxer, science-denying crackpots is a different matter, and that is what the Reform Parliament will be like.
@stodge - as always - raises another very important point.
If granny* is not in a care home, then someone is going to be looking after her. And if it's not the state, then it's likely to be somebody of working age. In which case, we're stuffing the dependeny ratio again... just in a different way.
* Assuming she has dementia or is otherwise unable to look after herself.
Again in my experience, Granny is often cared for by Grandpa, or vice versa. Working age people pop in at intervals, whether family or state. I myself (then working full time) helped my father care for my mother, then had to stop work (=retire early) to care for my father.
My mother (OGH's wife) has fairly advanced dementia. But she had always been absolutely insistent that she would not be moved to a home.
OGH did all the caring for a long while. But now his mobility is not good, and so we have live in care. My sister has also given up her job so as to help support my mother.
So, sure, spouses play a significant role. But spouses can't always keep providing needed care forever.
To claim universal credit you have to be actively seeking work and cannot turn down a job offer. The UK minimum wage is also now higher than ever at over £20,000 a year.
So there should be plenty of incentive for UK unemployed to take care home jobs now not just migrants, especially is there are now more out of work than there are job vacancies here. We should also follow the Japanese model of funding social care with insurance
Not so. There are around 3.4 million UC claimants who do. It need to work.
I concur your final sentence.
And how many of them are in any fit state to work?
How many of them would you want caring for your elderly rellies?
I don't know what the number of British people who shouldn't be working at all is, but it's somewhere higher than zero.
Don’t argue the toss with me over this. I’m just correcting HYUFD who said that to claim UC you need to be actively seeking work.
That’s not the case.
If you are out of work and claiming UC and not so disabled you can't work you have to be seeking work actively or you can be sanctioned and lose your UC
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
The only thing you need to think here is compared to what? Current or past government? Do me a favour!
So Reform is so much Astroturf that they can only find neo-fascist retreads to be their candidates, never mind ministers.
A 30% chance of being the next government, you say? Has no one here actually studied British History or Politics? The past is littered with sure fire new things that crashed and burned, from the New Party, the BUF or the National Front to Change UK. There is a far better chance than 30% that "Reform" will indeed crash and burn.
I can smell your fear - didn't make any post about Reform winning anything!
Why is a boat housing asylum seekers in Weymouth any different to a hotel housing asylum seekers in Weymouth except for being much more expensive (£6,000 per month per resident)
Easier to control. Also better value for money, according to the last Government. Plus it's not in Weymouth city centre. Or rather wasn't. Edit: it was in the Portland Harbour complex.
Yes, I know it was in Portland, which is next to Weymouth. I don't think there are any hotels used for asylum seekers in Portland though. More control? No, it might have looked like a prison but it wasn't one, residents were allowed to come and go as they pleased on the same basis as hotel accommodation. And it wasn't better value for money, the original plans by the government did promise it would be cheaper, but costs were more and occupancy less than expected. Here's a link to the National Audit Office report from March 2024. https://www.nao.org.uk/press-releases/alternative-asylum-accommodation-will-cost-more-than-hotels/
Still: better control - and more of it if needed. Not easy going through a hole in the back fence without a rowing boat. And the point is it wasn't in central Weymouth.
There are hotel(s) in Portland too but the barge was shoved out on the maritime equivalent of an industrial estate. And the per diem would have been much better if the HO had been more efficient with the occupancy.
Whatever one thinks of the basic notion of housing rather than processing the denizens, one can see that the idea did have a certain logic at the time.
How do you get the better control idea? also as the NAO report states, it was projected to cost £34.8m over 2023/24 and 2024/25, over 440 maximum capacity that's still £3,300/month. That is better than the hotel costs that are reported at £3,615 per resident per month but remember that the hotels won't be at 100% occupancy either so to be fair you will have to calculate the hotel cost by maximum occupancy as well.
Just to explain re control - do think about access. How do you get in an d out illicitly? Much more secure than an old army camp with any number of holes in the fence. And compared to a crap hotel with annexes ...
Point taken re hotels and occupancy but by the same token the hotels still lose unless HO is even less efficient with the barge, which seems unlikely.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
The only thing you need to think here is compared to what? Current or past government? Do me a favour!
So Reform is so much Astroturf that they can only find neo-fascist retreads to be their candidates, never mind ministers.
A 30% chance of being the next government, you say? Has no one here actually studied British History or Politics? The past is littered with sure fire new things that crashed and burned, from the New Party, the BUF or the National Front to Change UK. There is a far better chance than 30% that "Reform" will indeed crash and burn.
I can smell your fear - didn't make any post about Reform winning anything!
The sellers having made a five hundred percent profit on their home after 25 years coughing up would be more equitable than the poor old buyer having to front stamp duty at purchase.
The trouble is it's a tax on the transaction, not on the property. It's going to disincentive downsizing, which is an enormous issue when the UK has 26 million spare bedrooms (and rising).
Look at house transactions since 2008. They have collapsed - it's the most important symptom and perhaps contributor to why young people struggle to get going, even as average housing costs are the lowest they have been since the '80s.
The sentence "Families will find even less of granny’s inheritance trickling down." reveals an odd assumption which most of us make without thinking about it. Why should we model our society on the assumption that money will come down from our grandparents, bearing in mind that many people don't have rich grandparents, and they may have had complex relationships with multiple descendants.
Certainly the State should step in where needed. But assisting people in looking after themselves where they can needs to be part of the solution.
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
How do you stop them running away?
Desertion is a pretty serious offense.
How about. - Anyone who attempts to enter the U.K. by sea, illegally, is deemed to have enlisted in the Royal Navy.
Solves the manning problem overnight.
But maybe not the quality control one...
That would be even less wanted than conscription.
We would need more than the benefit to run the scheme.
It's terrible that the EU - and particularly a handful of countries (*) have not weaned themselves off Russian O&G. But surely the figures above are not all profit to the Russian government, as there would be hefty production costs.
(*) Some for good reasons; others for bad
It's basically a sign of a lack of seriousness in supporting Ukraine to fight the war when so much money is being handed over to Russia.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Hang on: remember Hungary is basically a full out supporter of Russia. How is the EU supposed to stop them from importing Russian oil and gas?
I would like to see a breakdown of the €21.9 billion by country, to see how much is exported to Hungary.
The energy sanctions have always been performative. The UK has continued to import plenty of Urals crude, dressed up as “Indian diesel”, much of it even refined in Russian state owned refineries geographically located in India. It made me so cross for such a long time that my thicko MP lacked the intellect to understand what I was saying. Luckily the dirty sod stood down last year before he lost his seat.
OK, this is sort of, but not really true.
As in, if you look solely at the volume of Russian crude exported, then it hasn't dropped much, falling from about 5 million barrels per day in on the eve of the war, down to 4.3mb/day currently.
But the amount of money Russia is getting for its barrels has dropped much more, because Russian crude now trades at about a 20% discount to Brent or WTI against maybe 2-3% before the war.
So, on the oil side they've been hit twice - lower volumes and lower prices. And - of course - they will have fixed costs per barrel of (say) $18-20, so their actual gross profits could easily have fallen 40+% relative to before the war.
There's another area that's not much covered, and that's oil and gas services. Oil fields don't keep pumping out the same amount of product year in, year out. They typically start very strongly, then decline each year. (This isn't true of all forms of oil, but Russian oil production is mostly conventional.)
Energy companies therefore will engage in Enhanced Oil Recovery of various types, basically renting expensive kit from Schlumberger or Halliburton to help maintain production from mature fields. (Indeed a large part of Russian recovery from the 1990s was the use of Western technology to revitalise oil fields.) Those technologies have largely been kept out of Russia thanks to sanctions, and that's impacting domestic production. Last year, overall Russian ol production dropped 4%.
One of the biggest sanctions the Kremlin wants lifting is the one on Western oil technologies.
On the subject of gas, total export volumes are less than half pre-war levels, and many of the pipelines are operating well below capacity.
The sentence "Families will find even less of granny’s inheritance trickling down." reveals an odd assumption which most of us make without thinking about it. Why should we model our society on the assumption that money will come down from our grandparents, bearing in mind that many people don't have rich grandparents, and they may have had complex relationships with multiple descendants.
Certainly the State should step in where needed. But assisting people in looking after themselves where they can needs to be part of the solution.
Everyone’s situation is unique. Many if not most grandparents want to leave their kids or grandkids a legacy. Perfectly natural. Why should the state have a claim on it?
Flip side is that if you are unlucky enough to need lots of care, then you ought to be paying for it if you can. I thought Theresa May had a useful idea for this, but sadly it was badly handled, dropped in at short notice and apparently toxic to voters.
The sellers having made a five hundred percent profit on their home after 25 years coughing up would be more equitable than the poor old buyer having to front stamp duty at purchase.
It will just be added to the asking price and the buyer pays it in higher mortgage charges
The sellers having made a five hundred percent profit on their home after 25 years coughing up would be more equitable than the poor old buyer having to front stamp duty at purchase.
The trouble is it's a tax on the transaction, not on the property. It's going to disincentive downsizing, which is an enormous issue when the UK has 26 million spare bedrooms (and rising).
Look at house transactions since 2008. They have collapsed - it's the most important symptom and perhaps contributor to why young people struggle to get going, even as average housing costs are the lowest they have been since the '80s.
The Estate Agents seem very positive about disposing of stamp duty and replacing it with a sellers' tax. The criticism has been that there also needs to be a root and branch change to council tax banding.
IANAE on the inner life of Reform, but as they have a 30%+ chance of forming a majority government next time, here is a question I have no idea about.
Does Reform have a modest collection of really serious names to be, between them:
CoE, Defence Minister, Health, Foreign Secretary? And most interesting of all, Home Secretary and Minister for Migration?
There are of course 100 other jobs to fill, including some of mega importance. But I can't even fill these. Can PB help?
No, they don’t. Almost nobody with serious policy, governance, or academic experience campaigns for Reform. The closest would be Anne Widdecombe and Jake Berry.
I wouldn’t focus on the career politicians. I have heard of some truly excellent people in industry being quietly approached to assist with policy creation. The sell is that they are almost certainly going to gain power and it’s a crucial period for the country to arrest its decline. Will be fascinating to see if this gets traction or not.
That may be so - and if it is it seems to be good news, but the problems that a government faces are not those of industry. You need someone fully involved. You need them to have their career on the line.
I am nearly sure that Reform will make the most awful of governments should we unwisely elect them.
They are bound to fill the benches with a high number of pirates and bandits. So no different to what we have been treated to by the Big 2 then.
I'm not sure how more pirates taken out of the front line would help or hinder Reforms attacks on Net Zero.
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
High Court awards temporary injunction to Epping Council to block migrant housing in hotel
The problem is where do you put them and won’t this act as a green light for protests at other hotels .
Detain them at popup camps with high fences until they can be deported.
There’s plenty of military land out there, not technically difficult to have the Army fence off an area and put up 10,000 tents in a couple of weeks. They do this in other countries, and the COVID emergency plans had something similar domestically.
It’s a political will issue, not an equipment and logistics issue.
Do you have no compassion for refugees from war?
How do you know they are refugees from war? They sneak over from France.
Comments
If granny* is not in a care home, then someone is going to be looking after her. And if it's not the state, then it's likely to be somebody of working age. In which case, we're stuffing the dependeny ratio again... just in a different way.
* Assuming she has dementia or is otherwise unable to look after herself.
The first line of a strategy for victory would be to stop sending money to Russia.
Solves the manning problem overnight.
@BillKristol
·
46m
“They put Trump’s name on the trucks.
This is the clearest signal that ICE is intended to be a personal, partisan police force that exists at the disposal of Trump.
This is not a choice someone makes if they intend to leave office in three years.”
https://x.com/BillKristol/status/1957856148356272631
* Some will be more underfunded than others, of course
Other countries are importing Russian oil and/or gas (LNG) with very little excuse aside from blatant financial self-interest.
There are hotel(s) in Portland too but the barge was shoved out on the maritime equivalent of an industrial estate. And the per diem would have been much better if the HO had been more efficient with the occupancy.
Whatever one thinks of the basic notion of housing rather than processing the denizens, one can see that the idea did have a certain logic at the time.
Robert Jenrick
@RobertJenrick
Congratulations to the people of Epping!
They protested. They were smeared. But they have won.
The solution, however, cannot be to move the illegal migrants and force them on another community.
This has gone on far too long. The country is well past breaking point. The last Government didn’t listen and failed. Starmer’s making it even worse.
Change the laws. Get third country deals. Deport everyone who’s come here illegally. End this.
OGH did all the caring for a long while. But now his mobility is not good, and so we have live in care. My sister has also given up her job so as to help support my mother.
So, sure, spouses play a significant role. But spouses can't always keep providing needed care forever.
Sure, not everyone is in a position to either receive of give unpaid care, but facilitating it for people who do is both compassionate and also good financially. Most of us are very happy to look after elderly relatives, repaying in small part the care they gave to us when we were young. Doing so also keeps the financial burden of Social Care off the local authority and national budgets. Being a more caring society in this makes great financial sense.
Well past breaking point. What a load of catsastrophising bullshit.
What do we have in place as legal and practical structures if we get to 216000, 432000 and so on? Nothing. Only quantity is saving us.
Enforcement Programme to protect children from encountering pornographic content through the use of age assurance
https://www.ofcom.org.uk/online-safety/protecting-children/enforcement-programme-to-protect-children-from-encountering-pornographic-content-through-the-use-of-age-assurance
A 30% chance of being the next government, you say? Has no one here actually studied British History or Politics? The past is littered with sure fire new things that crashed and burned, from the New Party, the BUF or the National Front to Change UK. There is a far better chance than 30% that "Reform" will indeed crash and burn.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyjg1q5y4qo
Connoisseurs of the genre of manipulative people who get through innumerable lawyers dealing with Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) would enjoy this recent exhaustive and exhausting judgment about someone who could give even Marten lessons in time wasting complexification and how it is done, though not in how to succeed.
https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2025/1103.html
The top EU importers of Russian fossil fuels are Hungary, France and Slovakia, apparently.
Anyway, the total aid from EU countries to Ukraine will be much higher than the figure given above.
https://x.com/tonydowson5/status/1957873251150922104?s=61
However can’t the pro asylum seeker Labour and Lib Dem run councils, some of whom are ‘cities of sanctuary’ simply approve a change of use for the hotel to allow the asylum seekers to come to their areas ?
So there should be plenty of incentive for UK unemployed to take care home jobs now not just migrants, especially is there are now more out of work than there are job vacancies here. We should also follow the Japanese model of funding social care with insurance
I concur your final sentence.
Reform, only a couple of months into local authority government are catastrophising in a way the Truss Government could only dream about.
https://x.com/barchart/status/1957870202479366334?s=61
A number of PB posters seem to think that Reform's chances at the next election are roughly 100%. I disagree.
There is money to be made if one can get this right!
But maths and betting wise, there must be separated out rigidly the maths of Will Reform Win the Nest Election and the maths of Can They Be Any Good At Governing As They Are Fantasising Loonies.
Maths is a severe discipline. It is perfectly possible that there is a 30% chance of a Reform majority government AND a 30%+ chance that they will crash and burn, as together they come it at under 100. But the funny thing about probabilities is that in the end only one horse wins the race.
I still think that Labour majority is the favourite for 2029. On PB this view is met with howls of derision.
How many of them would you want caring for your elderly rellies?
I don't know what the number of British people who shouldn't be working at all is, but it's somewhere higher than zero.
But even if policy creation is genuinely competent, getting it through a rabble of xenophobes, anti-vaxxer, science-denying crackpots is a different matter, and that is what the Reform Parliament will be like.
I am nearly sure that Reform will make the most awful of governments should we unwisely elect them.
That’s not the case.
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2025/aug/19/explainer-potential-property-tax-stamp-duty
https://avp.fandom.com/wiki/UA_571-C_Automated_Sentry_Gun
Obviously the sensible approach 😀
Good to see you clarify though.
Point taken re hotels and occupancy but by the same token the hotels still lose unless HO is even less efficient with the barge, which seems unlikely.
why doesn't the Smithsonian talk more about how the upsides of slavery?
https://x.com/atrupar/status/1957877356795670761
Look at house transactions since 2008. They have collapsed - it's the most important symptom and perhaps contributor to why young people struggle to get going, even as average housing costs are the lowest they have been since the '80s.
Certainly the State should step in where needed. But assisting people in looking after themselves where they can needs to be part of the solution.
We would need more than the benefit to run the scheme.
As in, if you look solely at the volume of Russian crude exported, then it hasn't dropped much, falling from about 5 million barrels per day in on the eve of the war, down to 4.3mb/day currently.
But the amount of money Russia is getting for its barrels has dropped much more, because Russian crude now trades at about a 20% discount to Brent or WTI against maybe 2-3% before the war.
So, on the oil side they've been hit twice - lower volumes and lower prices. And - of course - they will have fixed costs per barrel of (say) $18-20, so their actual gross profits could easily have fallen 40+% relative to before the war.
There's another area that's not much covered, and that's oil and gas services. Oil fields don't keep pumping out the same amount of product year in, year out. They typically start very strongly, then decline each year. (This isn't true of all forms of oil, but Russian oil production is mostly conventional.)
Energy companies therefore will engage in Enhanced Oil Recovery of various types, basically renting expensive kit from Schlumberger or Halliburton to help maintain production from mature fields. (Indeed a large part of Russian recovery from the 1990s was the use of Western technology to revitalise oil fields.) Those technologies have largely been kept out of Russia thanks to sanctions, and that's impacting domestic production. Last year, overall Russian ol production dropped 4%.
One of the biggest sanctions the Kremlin wants lifting is the one on Western oil technologies.
On the subject of gas, total export volumes are less than half pre-war levels, and many of the pipelines are operating well below capacity.
Flip side is that if you are unlucky enough to need lots of care, then you ought to be paying for it if you can. I thought Theresa May had a useful idea for this, but sadly it was badly handled, dropped in at short notice and apparently toxic to voters.