The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
Id be interested in what the case would be, as i imagine the law gives wide discretion on local elections to ministers, or legislation can be passed to do it.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
Id be interested in what the case would be, as i imagine the law gives wide discretion on local elections to ministers, or legislation can be passed to do it.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
The Tories and LDs postponed the Holyrood elections for a whole year to suit their Westminster priorities. Nothing happened.
Somewhat belatedly, it is time to go and get the Christmas tree. Then put some decs up. Our son is coming home in the early hours for Christmas. Looking forward to that.
This has been a very unhappy hear for me in politics. I feel an orphan. I have nothing but contempt for the SNP government in Scotland and I am in despair about the Labour government in London. My enthusiasm and even interest has waned sharply. I may have a break from PB for a while.
We're in a dull phase right now.
That's certainly part of the problem. Sometimes, as with the bug going round at the moment, the only answer is to hunker down and wait for nature to do its thing. The current personnel aren't ideal casting, sure. But if the alternatives are worse, what are we to do?
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
Besides, how did we get here and then get out? Part of the problem, I'm sure, is that we're demanding leadership qualities that go well beyond what we have any right to demand. Since Blair, we've had seven PMs, all of whom failed fairly unambiguously and fairly quickly. What was the sliding door moment where we could have avoided all this?
Unfair on Cameron. PM for seven years, led the best government of the last twenty years. Made one tiny miscalculation…
Cameron's “best government of the last twenty years” flatlined the economy, gerrymandered our electoral process (which arguably resulted in losing the referendum), broke the NHS (which is why there was no support for Lansley over plebgate), almost lost Scotland and did lose Europe.
Almost lost Scotland? The result was NO 55%.
Closer than initially predicted by many.
Not as close as Brexit, not as close as Wales '97!
Wales '97 was 50.3% yes to devolution, 49.7% no to devolution.
The point about the Scotland referendum was the direction of travel. Yes was gaining considerably in the face of Cameron's negative campaign – that Scotland was lsquo;too poor, too wee, too stupid’ for independence. It was only stopped when Gordon Brown and Ruth Davidson started to make the positive case for the union.
Michelle Mone was the "poster girl" of the Better Together campaign.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
Id be interested in what the case would be, as i imagine the law gives wide discretion on local elections to ministers, or legislation can be passed to do it.
It's early out but I think I'm going to base my early betting strategy on this vote share in 2029:
C - 27 L - 19 R - 21 LD - 15 G - 12
I think we're going to end up with a Con/Ref coalition after the election. My gut feeling is that the "punishment" narrative that the media pushed so hard against the Tories last time has gone away and people just aren't responding to Labour's attempts to blame the current economic fuck ups on the previous government and they are taking the majority of the blame for falling jobs, higher inflation and falling investment because of their tax rise agenda.
I also think that by the time 2029 rolls around Labour will have gone through at least two more rounds of tax rises and working age people will be fed up and be willing to give the Tories a go just on the basis of cutting spending and stopping taxes from rising to pay for welfare.
Interesting but optimistic and would require a lot more Reform voters to switch to the Conservatives,
On those numbers the Conservatives would likely win a small majority and even if only most seats would govern as a minority government not with Reform
It's just a feeling right now. From talking to people who were fairly reliable Tory voters but less so out loud, the mythical shy Tory if you will, the mood has changed. I think the latest budget which put up taxes on working people to pay more welfare has been a turning point for the party. People who were unwilling to give them another chance just 6 months ago are now open to the idea. The million Tory voters who stayed home last time are exactly the people who are being constantly targeted for higher tax, another couple or tax raising cycles and they will come running back to the party.
Just today I read that expectations are that 1/8 working age adults will be on some kind of disability benefit by the time of the election because Labour didn't cut welfare and restrict welfare access to spurious claimants who are a bit sad or "anxious" and get coaching on how to get signed off for benefits. There's no way that Labour don't come back for more money. They are incapable of not spending and there's no magical growth coming to balance the budget for them.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
Id be interested in what the case would be, as i imagine the law gives wide discretion on local elections to ministers, or legislation can be passed to do it.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
The Tories and LDs postponed the Holyrood elections for a whole year to suit their Westminster priorities. Nothing happened.
Despite fruatration and some risk their popularity would fall by next year, id think Reform wouldnt mind that much - they can argue, as im sure they will, that Labour are running scared.
Somewhat belatedly, it is time to go and get the Christmas tree. Then put some decs up. Our son is coming home in the early hours for Christmas. Looking forward to that.
This has been a very unhappy hear for me in politics. I feel an orphan. I have nothing but contempt for the SNP government in Scotland and I am in despair about the Labour government in London. My enthusiasm and even interest has waned sharply. I may have a break from PB for a while.
We're in a dull phase right now.
That's certainly part of the problem. Sometimes, as with the bug going round at the moment, the only answer is to hunker down and wait for nature to do its thing. The current personnel aren't ideal casting, sure. But if the alternatives are worse, what are we to do?
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
Besides, how did we get here and then get out? Part of the problem, I'm sure, is that we're demanding leadership qualities that go well beyond what we have any right to demand. Since Blair, we've had seven PMs, all of whom failed fairly unambiguously and fairly quickly. What was the sliding door moment where we could have avoided all this?
Unfair on Cameron. PM for seven years, led the best government of the last twenty years. Made one tiny miscalculation…
Cameron's “best government of the last twenty years” flatlined the economy, gerrymandered our electoral process (which arguably resulted in losing the referendum), broke the NHS (which is why there was no support for Lansley over plebgate), almost lost Scotland and did lose Europe.
Lansley wasn’t plebgate, surely? I think the coalition set the national finances on the road to recovery. If you look around, most western governments have flatlined since 2007. What Gerrymandering are you refering too?
Good point. Two people with the same first name. Deliberate mistake. AI slop. Autocorrect.
Until Osborne, we'd been largely tracking America's economy. Ours was recovering by the time of the election.
Gerrymandering. Cameron, Osborne and CCHQ generally had become convinced Labour had an unfair advantage, partly because they did not understand the notion of efficient vote spread, so needed to put their own thumb on the scale. Mainly this was done, in a ruse copied by the Republicans in America, by purging the electoral rolls and making registration harder, and then redrawing boundaries based on the new rolls, so that more seats were created in traditional Conservative areas than Labour ones. By also reducing the number of seats, they ensured every boundary had to be reconsidered. There was more to it than that but you get the gist.
So you believe that the electoral commission is biased? Because surely they are responsible for boundaries etc? And as for making registration harder? I get a letter that I have to log on and confirm or make changes. Pretty sure there are other ways too. It’s not rocket science.
Everyone involved in defence procurement at the MoD, with any responsibility for decision making on this program during the last decade and a half, should be put on notice. Unless they can provide good cause (for example, if they were recruited a few months ago, or they are on record as having consistently opposed the way in which Ajax has been handled), they ought to be fired.
This is a completely simplistic analysis and your proposed Nacht und Nebel in the MoD would solve nothing. It might be comforting to think that these programs might go better if only everyone were as knowledgeable, intelligent and industrious as a Daily Telegraph columnist or PB contributor. The underlying issue is these massive mega-projects have to serve multiple, diffuse and often contradictory objectives.
- Has to be built in Britain because we're the best at everything. - Has to create jobs in a politically convenient area. - The services want S-Tier equipment customised to their exact perceived needs and will leak like fuck to the Telegraph, Express, etc. if slighted. - These perceived needs change constantly over the life of the program. - The purchasing decision has to reinforce strategic alliances. (No point in buying Korean gear because we don't give a fuck what they think or want.)
The only way to improve it is to recast the purchasing decision as providing the most capability for the least money but that is (currently) politically impossible. Imagine the stink if we just had the FSS ships made in Vietnam for a third of the cost of pissing around in Belfast.
That completely ignores the multiple opportunities along the way to judge Ajax had gone wrong. And the fact that it would have been possible to build a workable system in the UK (as was offered over a decade ago) in the form of CV90.
I've already acknowledged my "solution" isn't in itself a workable plan, but your attitude is that nothing can be done better. That's just absurd and defeatist.
Everyone involved in defence procurement at the MoD, with any responsibility for decision making on this program during the last decade and a half, should be put on notice. Unless they can provide good cause (for example, if they were recruited a few months ago, or they are on record as having consistently opposed the way in which Ajax has been handled), they ought to be fired.
This is a completely simplistic analysis and your proposed Nacht und Nebel in the MoD would solve nothing. It might be comforting to think that these programs might go better if only everyone were as knowledgeable, intelligent and industrious as a Daily Telegraph columnist or PB contributor. The underlying issue is these massive mega-projects have to serve multiple, diffuse and often contradictory objectives.
- Has to be built in Britain because we're the best at everything. - Has to create jobs in a politically convenient area. - The services want S-Tier equipment customised to their exact perceived needs and will leak like fuck to the Telegraph, Express, etc. if slighted. - These perceived needs change constantly over the life of the program. - The purchasing decision has to reinforce strategic alliances. (No point in buying Korean gear because we don't give a fuck what they think or want.)
The only way to improve it is to recast the purchasing decision as providing the most capability for the least money but that is (currently) politically impossible. Imagine the stink if we just had the FSS ships made in Vietnam for a third of the cost of pissing around in Belfast.
That completely ignores the multiple opportunities along the way to judge Ajax had gone wrong. And the fact that it would have been possible to build a workable system in the UK (as was offered over a decade ago) in the form of CV90.
I've already acknowledged my "solution" isn't in itself a workable plan, but your attitude is that nothing can be done better. That's just absurd and defeatist.
The choice of vehicle is irrelevant. ASCOD2 (which begat Ajax) works fine for many operators. If CV90 had been selected, it would have been customised, optimised, localised, upgraded and generally buggered about in exactly the same way Ajax has with likely similar results.
Somewhat belatedly, it is time to go and get the Christmas tree. Then put some decs up. Our son is coming home in the early hours for Christmas. Looking forward to that.
This has been a very unhappy hear for me in politics. I feel an orphan. I have nothing but contempt for the SNP government in Scotland and I am in despair about the Labour government in London. My enthusiasm and even interest has waned sharply. I may have a break from PB for a while.
I find the despair saps interest because there's no optimism in any direction. Process-focused government abdicates leadership. However good the process is, it can't take the country in any particular direction so it feels as though we're circling the drain.
It's early out but I think I'm going to base my early betting strategy on this vote share in 2029:
C - 27 L - 19 R - 21 LD - 15 G - 12
I think we're going to end up with a Con/Ref coalition after the election. My gut feeling is that the "punishment" narrative that the media pushed so hard against the Tories last time has gone away and people just aren't responding to Labour's attempts to blame the current economic fuck ups on the previous government and they are taking the majority of the blame for falling jobs, higher inflation and falling investment because of their tax rise agenda.
I also think that by the time 2029 rolls around Labour will have gone through at least two more rounds of tax rises and working age people will be fed up and be willing to give the Tories a go just on the basis of cutting spending and stopping taxes from rising to pay for welfare.
Interesting but optimistic and would require a lot more Reform voters to switch to the Conservatives,
On those numbers the Conservatives would likely win a small majority and even if only most seats would govern as a minority government not with Reform
It's just a feeling right now. From talking to people who were fairly reliable Tory voters but less so out loud, the mythical shy Tory if you will, the mood has changed. I think the latest budget which put up taxes on working people to pay more welfare has been a turning point for the party. People who were unwilling to give them another chance just 6 months ago are now open to the idea. The million Tory voters who stayed home last time are exactly the people who are being constantly targeted for higher tax, another couple or tax raising cycles and they will come running back to the party.
Just today I read that expectations are that 1/8 working age adults will be on some kind of disability benefit by the time of the election because Labour didn't cut welfare and restrict welfare access to spurious claimants who are a bit sad or "anxious" and get coaching on how to get signed off for benefits. There's no way that Labour don't come back for more money. They are incapable of not spending and there's no magical growth coming to balance the budget for them.
The Tories could have cut welfare and restrict welfare access during the 15 years they were in power
Sadly they didn't..
Mind you I would prefer a Tory Government than a Reform one - heck Monster Raving Looney would be better than Reform...
The last time I had a similar feeling was coming out of COVID and speaking to people who were out partying and spending like nobodies business and from speaking to lots of clients who had massive order books they couldn't handle while the ONS were saying that the UK was the only major country not to have come out of the COVID recessions.
I remember posting extensively on here suggesting that the official data seemed to be out of step with what I and many others were seeing out in the real world and I also remember getting shouted down by the same usual suspects that speaking to real people and "anecdata" was no substitute for official data. As it turned out I was right and the ONS was wrong, the UK exited the COVID recession the fastest of any major European nation and grew faster post-COVID than comparable European countries too but the ONS had just completely fucked it and understated key sectors while overstating the impact of state output.
It's just a feeling and it's just conversations with people, though I think the Tory party has turned a corner. Labour opened the door and I don't think they know how to close it again because they are unable to cut spending and keep taxes down.
It's early out but I think I'm going to base my early betting strategy on this vote share in 2029:
C - 27 L - 19 R - 21 LD - 15 G - 12
I think we're going to end up with a Con/Ref coalition after the election. My gut feeling is that the "punishment" narrative that the media pushed so hard against the Tories last time has gone away and people just aren't responding to Labour's attempts to blame the current economic fuck ups on the previous government and they are taking the majority of the blame for falling jobs, higher inflation and falling investment because of their tax rise agenda.
I also think that by the time 2029 rolls around Labour will have gone through at least two more rounds of tax rises and working age people will be fed up and be willing to give the Tories a go just on the basis of cutting spending and stopping taxes from rising to pay for welfare.
Interesting but optimistic and would require a lot more Reform voters to switch to the Conservatives,
On those numbers the Conservatives would likely win a small majority and even if only most seats would govern as a minority government not with Reform
It's just a feeling right now. From talking to people who were fairly reliable Tory voters but less so out loud, the mythical shy Tory if you will, the mood has changed. I think the latest budget which put up taxes on working people to pay more welfare has been a turning point for the party. People who were unwilling to give them another chance just 6 months ago are now open to the idea. The million Tory voters who stayed home last time are exactly the people who are being constantly targeted for higher tax, another couple or tax raising cycles and they will come running back to the party.
Just today I read that expectations are that 1/8 working age adults will be on some kind of disability benefit by the time of the election because Labour didn't cut welfare and restrict welfare access to spurious claimants who are a bit sad or "anxious" and get coaching on how to get signed off for benefits. There's no way that Labour don't come back for more money. They are incapable of not spending and there's no magical growth coming to balance the budget for them.
The Tories could have cut welfare and restrict welfare access during the 15 years they were in power
Sadly they didn't..
Mind you I would prefer a Tory Government than a Reform one - heck Monster Raving Looney would be better than Reform...
Maybe, maybe not. The difference is that they never had such an explicit budget event where they put taxes up to pay for more welfare. I think it's probably top 3 most unpopular policies in the last decade. Labour can bang on about child poverty until they're blue in the face, working people are fed up of funding endless welfare and that gives the Tory party a way back. This is the message and wedge issue that will get them back in contention because Reform are weak on welfare too.
The last time I had a similar feeling was coming out of COVID and speaking to people who were out partying and spending like nobodies business and from speaking to lots of clients who had massive order books they couldn't handle while the ONS were saying that the UK was the only major country not to have come out of the COVID recessions.
I remember posting extensively on here suggesting that the official data seemed to be out of step with what I and many others were seeing out in the real world and I also remember getting shouted down by the same usual suspects that speaking to real people and "anecdata" was no substitute for official data. As it turned out I was right and the ONS was wrong, the UK exited the COVID recession the fastest of any major European nation and grew faster post-COVID than comparable European countries too but the ONS had just completely fucked it and understated key sectors while overstating the impact of state output.
It's just a feeling and it's just conversations with people, though I think the Tory party has turned a corner. Labour opened the door and I don't think they know how to close it again because they are unable to cut spending and keep taxes down.
Everyone involved in defence procurement at the MoD, with any responsibility for decision making on this program during the last decade and a half, should be put on notice. Unless they can provide good cause (for example, if they were recruited a few months ago, or they are on record as having consistently opposed the way in which Ajax has been handled), they ought to be fired.
This is a completely simplistic analysis and your proposed Nacht und Nebel in the MoD would solve nothing. It might be comforting to think that these programs might go better if only everyone were as knowledgeable, intelligent and industrious as a Daily Telegraph columnist or PB contributor. The underlying issue is these massive mega-projects have to serve multiple, diffuse and often contradictory objectives.
- Has to be built in Britain because we're the best at everything. - Has to create jobs in a politically convenient area. - The services want S-Tier equipment customised to their exact perceived needs and will leak like fuck to the Telegraph, Express, etc. if slighted. - These perceived needs change constantly over the life of the program. - The purchasing decision has to reinforce strategic alliances. (No point in buying Korean gear because we don't give a fuck what they think or want.)
The only way to improve it is to recast the purchasing decision as providing the most capability for the least money but that is (currently) politically impossible. Imagine the stink if we just had the FSS ships made in Vietnam for a third of the cost of pissing around in Belfast.
That completely ignores the multiple opportunities along the way to judge Ajax had gone wrong. And the fact that it would have been possible to build a workable system in the UK (as was offered over a decade ago) in the form of CV90.
I've already acknowledged my "solution" isn't in itself a workable plan, but your attitude is that nothing can be done better. That's just absurd and defeatist.
The sane approach to procurement of most things at scale (and f you want them to be made in the UK) is
- do we have the domestic factory/skills for it already? - if not, buy an *existing* foreign design in enough quantity that as part of the deal, they set up a factory here. - this creates the skills, automatically.
So if you want to setup a huge factory to make batteries for electric vehicles, make a huge order from someone like Panasonic, with setting up the factory in Northumberland (or wherever) part of the deal. This creates an in country skill pool of people who work in battery factories, build them, run them.
This approach has created industries in many, many countries around the world.
Somewhat belatedly, it is time to go and get the Christmas tree. Then put some decs up. Our son is coming home in the early hours for Christmas. Looking forward to that.
This has been a very unhappy hear for me in politics. I feel an orphan. I have nothing but contempt for the SNP government in Scotland and I am in despair about the Labour government in London. My enthusiasm and even interest has waned sharply. I may have a break from PB for a while.
We're in a dull phase right now.
That's certainly part of the problem. Sometimes, as with the bug going round at the moment, the only answer is to hunker down and wait for nature to do its thing. The current personnel aren't ideal casting, sure. But if the alternatives are worse, what are we to do?
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
Besides, how did we get here and then get out? Part of the problem, I'm sure, is that we're demanding leadership qualities that go well beyond what we have any right to demand. Since Blair, we've had seven PMs, all of whom failed fairly unambiguously and fairly quickly. What was the sliding door moment where we could have avoided all this?
Unfair on Cameron. PM for seven years, led the best government of the last twenty years. Made one tiny miscalculation…
Cameron's “best government of the last twenty years” flatlined the economy, gerrymandered our electoral process (which arguably resulted in losing the referendum), broke the NHS (which is why there was no support for Lansley over plebgate), almost lost Scotland and did lose Europe.
Lansley wasn’t plebgate, surely? I think the coalition set the national finances on the road to recovery. If you look around, most western governments have flatlined since 2007. What Gerrymandering are you refering too?
Good point. Two people with the same first name. Deliberate mistake. AI slop. Autocorrect.
Until Osborne, we'd been largely tracking America's economy. Ours was recovering by the time of the election.
Gerrymandering. Cameron, Osborne and CCHQ generally had become convinced Labour had an unfair advantage, partly because they did not understand the notion of efficient vote spread, so needed to put their own thumb on the scale. Mainly this was done, in a ruse copied by the Republicans in America, by purging the electoral rolls and making registration harder, and then redrawing boundaries based on the new rolls, so that more seats were created in traditional Conservative areas than Labour ones. By also reducing the number of seats, they ensured every boundary had to be reconsidered. There was more to it than that but you get the gist.
So you believe that the electoral commission is biased? Because surely they are responsible for boundaries etc? And as for making registration harder? I get a letter that I have to log on and confirm or make changes. Pretty sure there are other ways too. It’s not rocket science.
Is it bias to follow a biased system and deliver a biased outcome? IMO no but the result is still skewed,
Everyone involved in defence procurement at the MoD, with any responsibility for decision making on this program during the last decade and a half, should be put on notice. Unless they can provide good cause (for example, if they were recruited a few months ago, or they are on record as having consistently opposed the way in which Ajax has been handled), they ought to be fired.
This is a completely simplistic analysis and your proposed Nacht und Nebel in the MoD would solve nothing. It might be comforting to think that these programs might go better if only everyone were as knowledgeable, intelligent and industrious as a Daily Telegraph columnist or PB contributor. The underlying issue is these massive mega-projects have to serve multiple, diffuse and often contradictory objectives.
- Has to be built in Britain because we're the best at everything. - Has to create jobs in a politically convenient area. - The services want S-Tier equipment customised to their exact perceived needs and will leak like fuck to the Telegraph, Express, etc. if slighted. - These perceived needs change constantly over the life of the program. - The purchasing decision has to reinforce strategic alliances. (No point in buying Korean gear because we don't give a fuck what they think or want.)
The only way to improve it is to recast the purchasing decision as providing the most capability for the least money but that is (currently) politically impossible. Imagine the stink if we just had the FSS ships made in Vietnam for a third of the cost of pissing around in Belfast.
That completely ignores the multiple opportunities along the way to judge Ajax had gone wrong. And the fact that it would have been possible to build a workable system in the UK (as was offered over a decade ago) in the form of CV90.
I've already acknowledged my "solution" isn't in itself a workable plan, but your attitude is that nothing can be done better. That's just absurd and defeatist.
The choice of vehicle is irrelevant. ASCOD2 (which begat Ajax) works fine for many operators. If CV90 had been selected, it would have been customised, optimised, localised, upgraded and generally buggered about in exactly the same way Ajax has with likely similar results.
Then you buy a large ruler and whack anyone suggesting "unique British requirements" over the knuckles. Strangely, other countries manage to live with CV90, just as it is.
The header reminds me that when I am stuck on a desert island my luxuries will be a really good coffee machine and one of those conveyor belt toast making things you get at breakfast in Premier Inns.
Who, by the way, is Marco Longhi?
Will you have a battery or source of power? Otherwise I’d personally find it quite frustrating
The last time I had a similar feeling was coming out of COVID and speaking to people who were out partying and spending like nobodies business and from speaking to lots of clients who had massive order books they couldn't handle while the ONS were saying that the UK was the only major country not to have come out of the COVID recessions.
I remember posting extensively on here suggesting that the official data seemed to be out of step with what I and many others were seeing out in the real world and I also remember getting shouted down by the same usual suspects that speaking to real people and "anecdata" was no substitute for official data. As it turned out I was right and the ONS was wrong, the UK exited the COVID recession the fastest of any major European nation and grew faster post-COVID than comparable European countries too but the ONS had just completely fucked it and understated key sectors while overstating the impact of state output.
It's just a feeling and it's just conversations with people, though I think the Tory party has turned a corner. Labour opened the door and I don't think they know how to close it again because they are unable to cut spending and keep taxes down.
A very interesting thought. A couple of comments.
It seems to me there is no single direction of the relevant electoral forces, and that the contradictions will have to work themselves out over time. 2026 will be a fascinating year.
Tories: Yes, they are less written off than they were. But the 'right' vote (Con + Reform) won't in totality get to more than about 50% total. So for the Tories to do well, Reform must do badly. Labour being terrible (they are) isn't enough, and Labour being terrible feeds Reform as it shows 'they are all the same'.
Labour: They are terrible but a change of leader looks certain to most people (I am agnostic). If that happens, all bets are off. Further, though they are terrible, there is, unlike on the 'right', no one group on the left/centre left that looks like being able to eat them. Which gives them a stable ground for recovery on the old basis: payroll vote, urban vote, BAME vote, benefits vote, public sector vote, keep Tories and Reform out vote and so on. Labour's recovery is not dependent on the balance of the Tory/Reform battle. Both groups, left and right, have about half the votes each.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
If councils vote to postpone elections until their new unitary councils are ready to be elected and the government respects that decision there are no legal grounds to overturn it
Everyone involved in defence procurement at the MoD, with any responsibility for decision making on this program during the last decade and a half, should be put on notice. Unless they can provide good cause (for example, if they were recruited a few months ago, or they are on record as having consistently opposed the way in which Ajax has been handled), they ought to be fired.
This is a completely simplistic analysis and your proposed Nacht und Nebel in the MoD would solve nothing. It might be comforting to think that these programs might go better if only everyone were as knowledgeable, intelligent and industrious as a Daily Telegraph columnist or PB contributor. The underlying issue is these massive mega-projects have to serve multiple, diffuse and often contradictory objectives.
- Has to be built in Britain because we're the best at everything. - Has to create jobs in a politically convenient area. - The services want S-Tier equipment customised to their exact perceived needs and will leak like fuck to the Telegraph, Express, etc. if slighted. - These perceived needs change constantly over the life of the program. - The purchasing decision has to reinforce strategic alliances. (No point in buying Korean gear because we don't give a fuck what they think or want.)
The only way to improve it is to recast the purchasing decision as providing the most capability for the least money but that is (currently) politically impossible. Imagine the stink if we just had the FSS ships made in Vietnam for a third of the cost of pissing around in Belfast.
That completely ignores the multiple opportunities along the way to judge Ajax had gone wrong. And the fact that it would have been possible to build a workable system in the UK (as was offered over a decade ago) in the form of CV90.
I've already acknowledged my "solution" isn't in itself a workable plan, but your attitude is that nothing can be done better. That's just absurd and defeatist.
The choice of vehicle is irrelevant. ASCOD2 (which begat Ajax) works fine for many operators. If CV90 had been selected, it would have been customised, optimised, localised, upgraded and generally buggered about in exactly the same way Ajax has with likely similar results.
Does it work fine for many operators ? With Booker cancelled, there are basically Spain and Austria. In contrast CV90 is one of the standard systems across Europe.
But you are entirely correct about the nexus between unrealistic service wish lists, MoD procurement, political indecision, uncertain defence budgets - and general dishonesty about things going wrong. It's the latter which is the most glaring deficiency on the Ajax program, and what people deserve to be sacked for.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
If councils vote to postpone elections until their new unitary councils are ready to be elected and the government respects that decision there are no legal grounds to overturn it
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
If councils vote to postpone elections until their new unitary councils are ready to be elected and the government respects that decision there are no legal grounds to overturn it
Wait. An individual council can vote to not have elections and that is the end of it?
Somewhat belatedly, it is time to go and get the Christmas tree. Then put some decs up. Our son is coming home in the early hours for Christmas. Looking forward to that.
This has been a very unhappy hear for me in politics. I feel an orphan. I have nothing but contempt for the SNP government in Scotland and I am in despair about the Labour government in London. My enthusiasm and even interest has waned sharply. I may have a break from PB for a while.
We're in a dull phase right now.
That's certainly part of the problem. Sometimes, as with the bug going round at the moment, the only answer is to hunker down and wait for nature to do its thing. The current personnel aren't ideal casting, sure. But if the alternatives are worse, what are we to do?
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
Besides, how did we get here and then get out? Part of the problem, I'm sure, is that we're demanding leadership qualities that go well beyond what we have any right to demand. Since Blair, we've had seven PMs, all of whom failed fairly unambiguously and fairly quickly. What was the sliding door moment where we could have avoided all this?
Unfair on Cameron. PM for seven years, led the best government of the last twenty years. Made one tiny miscalculation…
Cameron's “best government of the last twenty years” flatlined the economy, gerrymandered our electoral process (which arguably resulted in losing the referendum), broke the NHS (which is why there was no support for Lansley over plebgate), almost lost Scotland and did lose Europe.
Lansley wasn’t plebgate, surely? I think the coalition set the national finances on the road to recovery. If you look around, most western governments have flatlined since 2007. What Gerrymandering are you refering too?
Mitchell.
Oh for the days when the police unions thought it was ok to lie in sworn testimony to bring down a government minister
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
Id be interested in what the case would be, as i imagine the law gives wide discretion on local elections to ministers, or legislation can be passed to do it.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
The Tories and LDs postponed the Holyrood elections for a whole year to suit their Westminster priorities. Nothing happened.
I thought Holyrood did that themselves because they wanted to avoid having the Holyrood elections at the same time as the Westminster election. Didn't they switch to five-year terms at the same time?
Okay, so I looked this up. The legislation was passed at Westminster, but all the parties agreed to it, because there was a recommendation not to have elections with different voting systems on the same day. Clegg did offer that the Holyrood elections could have been brought forward a year, but the choice was made to delay instead.
For the next election it was the Scottish government that chose to delay to 2021 to avoid a clash with the Westminster election that was due in 2020 (after the 2015 general election). So, again, this was not imposed on Scotland, and it changed the default term of a Scottish Parliament to five years. By legislation passed at Holyrood.
Why do ScotNats always have to blame everything on Westminster when they've done the thing themselves? It's not like we can't check.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
If councils vote to postpone elections until their new unitary councils are ready to be elected and the government respects that decision there are no legal grounds to overturn it
Wait. An individual council can vote to not have elections and that is the end of it?
First I have ever heard of this legal power.
Yes, if the government allows it to do so as this government has and this government has a majority in Parliament which is sovereign in UK law
The last time I had a similar feeling was coming out of COVID and speaking to people who were out partying and spending like nobodies business and from speaking to lots of clients who had massive order books they couldn't handle while the ONS were saying that the UK was the only major country not to have come out of the COVID recessions.
I remember posting extensively on here suggesting that the official data seemed to be out of step with what I and many others were seeing out in the real world and I also remember getting shouted down by the same usual suspects that speaking to real people and "anecdata" was no substitute for official data. As it turned out I was right and the ONS was wrong, the UK exited the COVID recession the fastest of any major European nation and grew faster post-COVID than comparable European countries too but the ONS had just completely fucked it and understated key sectors while overstating the impact of state output.
It's just a feeling and it's just conversations with people, though I think the Tory party has turned a corner. Labour opened the door and I don't think they know how to close it again because they are unable to cut spending and keep taxes down.
A very interesting thought. A couple of comments.
It seems to me there is no single direction of the relevant electoral forces, and that the contradictions will have to work themselves out over time. 2026 will be a fascinating year.
Tories: Yes, they are less written off than they were. But the 'right' vote (Con + Reform) won't in totality get to more than about 50% total. So for the Tories to do well, Reform must do badly. Labour being terrible (they are) isn't enough, and Labour being terrible feeds Reform as it shows 'they are all the same'.
Labour: They are terrible but a change of leader looks certain to most people (I am agnostic). If that happens, all bets are off. Further, though they are terrible, there is, unlike on the 'right', no one group on the left/centre left that looks like being able to eat them. Which gives them a stable ground for recovery on the old basis: payroll vote, urban vote, BAME vote, benefits vote, public sector vote, keep Tories and Reform out vote and so on. Labour's recovery is not dependent on the balance of the Tory/Reform battle. Both groups, left and right, have about half the votes each.
I think something we learned from the chaotic Tory rule from 2021-2024 was that changing leader was no panacea. I actually think that changing leader for Labour will produce no substantially or sustained bounce and it will bring about calls for an early election from Reform that will dog them all the way until 2029 with Farage calling whoever replaces Starmer as illegitimate and usurper etc...
On the Tory/Reform share I agree, I think between them they'll end up on 46-49% with Reform weakening over the next three years and the Tories gaining. A 3-5 point swing between them. The more Labour screw up the economy the more it hurts Reform as mild Reform voters will run back to the Tories just to get the economy back working properly and public spending back under control.
Everyone involved in defence procurement at the MoD, with any responsibility for decision making on this program during the last decade and a half, should be put on notice. Unless they can provide good cause (for example, if they were recruited a few months ago, or they are on record as having consistently opposed the way in which Ajax has been handled), they ought to be fired.
This is a completely simplistic analysis and your proposed Nacht und Nebel in the MoD would solve nothing. It might be comforting to think that these programs might go better if only everyone were as knowledgeable, intelligent and industrious as a Daily Telegraph columnist or PB contributor. The underlying issue is these massive mega-projects have to serve multiple, diffuse and often contradictory objectives.
- Has to be built in Britain because we're the best at everything. - Has to create jobs in a politically convenient area. - The services want S-Tier equipment customised to their exact perceived needs and will leak like fuck to the Telegraph, Express, etc. if slighted. - These perceived needs change constantly over the life of the program. - The purchasing decision has to reinforce strategic alliances. (No point in buying Korean gear because we don't give a fuck what they think or want.)
The only way to improve it is to recast the purchasing decision as providing the most capability for the least money but that is (currently) politically impossible. Imagine the stink if we just had the FSS ships made in Vietnam for a third of the cost of pissing around in Belfast.
That completely ignores the multiple opportunities along the way to judge Ajax had gone wrong. And the fact that it would have been possible to build a workable system in the UK (as was offered over a decade ago) in the form of CV90.
I've already acknowledged my "solution" isn't in itself a workable plan, but your attitude is that nothing can be done better. That's just absurd and defeatist.
The choice of vehicle is irrelevant. ASCOD2 (which begat Ajax) works fine for many operators. If CV90 had been selected, it would have been customised, optimised, localised, upgraded and generally buggered about in exactly the same way Ajax has with likely similar results.
Then you buy a large ruler and whack anyone suggesting "unique British requirements" over the knuckles. Strangely, other countries manage to live with CV90, just as it is.
It would also appear there are basic issues of build quality, and the ones running the process on the MOD side often seem to find jobs and lucrative sinecures with the manufacturers.
'Simplistic' is an overused word that is usually deployed to decry any analysis that is actually just 'simple', as if its simplicity were an inherent demerit. These people should be sacked. If and when that 'simplistic' solution fails, something more complex might be needed.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
If councils vote to postpone elections until their new unitary councils are ready to be elected and the government respects that decision there are no legal grounds to overturn it
Looks as if you want democracy denied
Up to councils. Taxpayers spending a fortune to hold county and district elections for councillors next year who will be made redundant in 2027 when the first unitary councillors to replace them are elected (with only about a third of the number of seats district councils had available and with county councillors looking for a unitary seat as well) is not really denying democracy.
The last time I had a similar feeling was coming out of COVID and speaking to people who were out partying and spending like nobodies business and from speaking to lots of clients who had massive order books they couldn't handle while the ONS were saying that the UK was the only major country not to have come out of the COVID recessions.
I remember posting extensively on here suggesting that the official data seemed to be out of step with what I and many others were seeing out in the real world and I also remember getting shouted down by the same usual suspects that speaking to real people and "anecdata" was no substitute for official data. As it turned out I was right and the ONS was wrong, the UK exited the COVID recession the fastest of any major European nation and grew faster post-COVID than comparable European countries too but the ONS had just completely fucked it and understated key sectors while overstating the impact of state output.
It's just a feeling and it's just conversations with people, though I think the Tory party has turned a corner. Labour opened the door and I don't think they know how to close it again because they are unable to cut spending and keep taxes down.
A very interesting thought. A couple of comments.
It seems to me there is no single direction of the relevant electoral forces, and that the contradictions will have to work themselves out over time. 2026 will be a fascinating year.
Tories: Yes, they are less written off than they were. But the 'right' vote (Con + Reform) won't in totality get to more than about 50% total. So for the Tories to do well, Reform must do badly. Labour being terrible (they are) isn't enough, and Labour being terrible feeds Reform as it shows 'they are all the same'.
Labour: They are terrible but a change of leader looks certain to most people (I am agnostic). If that happens, all bets are off. Further, though they are terrible, there is, unlike on the 'right', no one group on the left/centre left that looks like being able to eat them. Which gives them a stable ground for recovery on the old basis: payroll vote, urban vote, BAME vote, benefits vote, public sector vote, keep Tories and Reform out vote and so on. Labour's recovery is not dependent on the balance of the Tory/Reform battle. Both groups, left and right, have about half the votes each.
It's fascinating to me, how small shifts in voting intention have big consequences, right now.
If the Right bloc splits something like Reform 26 Con 24, the Conservatives are very much in the game. If it's 28, 22, they are done for.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
If councils vote to postpone elections until their new unitary councils are ready to be elected and the government respects that decision there are no legal grounds to overturn it
Wait. An individual council can vote to not have elections and that is the end of it?
First I have ever heard of this legal power.
Yes, if the government allows it to do so as this government has and this government has a majority in Parliament which is sovereign in UK law
Ok, but that is somewhat different to how the original sounded.
But let's move on: I'm against cancelling elections. Even if it is one year.
The last time I had a similar feeling was coming out of COVID and speaking to people who were out partying and spending like nobodies business and from speaking to lots of clients who had massive order books they couldn't handle while the ONS were saying that the UK was the only major country not to have come out of the COVID recessions.
I remember posting extensively on here suggesting that the official data seemed to be out of step with what I and many others were seeing out in the real world and I also remember getting shouted down by the same usual suspects that speaking to real people and "anecdata" was no substitute for official data. As it turned out I was right and the ONS was wrong, the UK exited the COVID recession the fastest of any major European nation and grew faster post-COVID than comparable European countries too but the ONS had just completely fucked it and understated key sectors while overstating the impact of state output.
It's just a feeling and it's just conversations with people, though I think the Tory party has turned a corner. Labour opened the door and I don't think they know how to close it again because they are unable to cut spending and keep taxes down.
A very interesting thought. A couple of comments.
It seems to me there is no single direction of the relevant electoral forces, and that the contradictions will have to work themselves out over time. 2026 will be a fascinating year.
Tories: Yes, they are less written off than they were. But the 'right' vote (Con + Reform) won't in totality get to more than about 50% total. So for the Tories to do well, Reform must do badly. Labour being terrible (they are) isn't enough, and Labour being terrible feeds Reform as it shows 'they are all the same'.
Labour: They are terrible but a change of leader looks certain to most people (I am agnostic). If that happens, all bets are off. Further, though they are terrible, there is, unlike on the 'right', no one group on the left/centre left that looks like being able to eat them. Which gives them a stable ground for recovery on the old basis: payroll vote, urban vote, BAME vote, benefits vote, public sector vote, keep Tories and Reform out vote and so on. Labour's recovery is not dependent on the balance of the Tory/Reform battle. Both groups, left and right, have about half the votes each.
I think something we learned from the chaotic Tory rule from 2021-2024 was that changing leader was no panacea. I actually think that changing leader for Labour will produce no substantially or sustained bounce and it will bring about calls for an early election from Reform that will dog them all the way until 2029 with Farage calling whoever replaces Starmer as illegitimate and usurper etc...
On the Tory/Reform share I agree, I think between them they'll end up on 46-49% with Reform weakening over the next three years and the Tories gaining. A 3-5 point swing between them. The more Labour screw up the economy the more it hurts Reform as mild Reform voters will run back to the Tories just to get the economy back working properly and public spending back under control.
You think there still won't be a right wing majority by the time Labour get booted? I don't. It's creeping over 50% now in some polls.
UK borrowing costs are expected to fall further next year, according to the average forecast from nine big investment banks, as investors increasingly price in interest rate cuts from the Bank of England (BoE) after a prolonged period of restrictive monetary policy.
Britain's 10-year bond yield, which hit a 16-year high of 4.95% at the start of 2025 — due to worries about near-record debt issuance and a global bond sell-off — is expected to come down to 4.32% by the end of 2026.
Investment bankers expect UK gilts to be the best performers amongst peer countries. They are impressed by the brilliance of Rachel Reeves budget.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
If councils vote to postpone elections until their new unitary councils are ready to be elected and the government respects that decision there are no legal grounds to overturn it
Looks as if you want democracy denied
Up to councils. Taxpayers spending a fortune to hold county and district elections for councillors next year who will be made redundant in 2027 when the first unitary councillors to replace them are elected (with only about a third of the number of seats district councils had available and with county councillors looking for a unitary seat as well) is not really denying democracy.
The government have left local councils moving to becoming unitaries to decide if they want elections next year, likely for just one year council seats, until the first elections for unitaries are held in 2027
I know that but it looks iffy, is iffy, and the Electoral Commission is not happy
I expect legal action to follow
If councils vote to postpone elections until their new unitary councils are ready to be elected and the government respects that decision there are no legal grounds to overturn it
Looks as if you want democracy denied
Up to councils. Taxpayers spending a fortune to hold county and district elections for councillors next year who will be made redundant in 2027 when the first unitary councillors to replace them are elected (with only about a third of the number of seats district councils had available and with county councillors looking for a unitary seat as well) is not really denying democracy.
The last time I had a similar feeling was coming out of COVID and speaking to people who were out partying and spending like nobodies business and from speaking to lots of clients who had massive order books they couldn't handle while the ONS were saying that the UK was the only major country not to have come out of the COVID recessions.
I remember posting extensively on here suggesting that the official data seemed to be out of step with what I and many others were seeing out in the real world and I also remember getting shouted down by the same usual suspects that speaking to real people and "anecdata" was no substitute for official data. As it turned out I was right and the ONS was wrong, the UK exited the COVID recession the fastest of any major European nation and grew faster post-COVID than comparable European countries too but the ONS had just completely fucked it and understated key sectors while overstating the impact of state output.
It's just a feeling and it's just conversations with people, though I think the Tory party has turned a corner. Labour opened the door and I don't think they know how to close it again because they are unable to cut spending and keep taxes down.
A very interesting thought. A couple of comments.
It seems to me there is no single direction of the relevant electoral forces, and that the contradictions will have to work themselves out over time. 2026 will be a fascinating year.
Tories: Yes, they are less written off than they were. But the 'right' vote (Con + Reform) won't in totality get to more than about 50% total. So for the Tories to do well, Reform must do badly. Labour being terrible (they are) isn't enough, and Labour being terrible feeds Reform as it shows 'they are all the same'.
Labour: They are terrible but a change of leader looks certain to most people (I am agnostic). If that happens, all bets are off. Further, though they are terrible, there is, unlike on the 'right', no one group on the left/centre left that looks like being able to eat them. Which gives them a stable ground for recovery on the old basis: payroll vote, urban vote, BAME vote, benefits vote, public sector vote, keep Tories and Reform out vote and so on. Labour's recovery is not dependent on the balance of the Tory/Reform battle. Both groups, left and right, have about half the votes each.
I think something we learned from the chaotic Tory rule from 2021-2024 was that changing leader was no panacea. I actually think that changing leader for Labour will produce no substantially or sustained bounce and it will bring about calls for an early election from Reform that will dog them all the way until 2029 with Farage calling whoever replaces Starmer as illegitimate and usurper etc...
On the Tory/Reform share I agree, I think between them they'll end up on 46-49% with Reform weakening over the next three years and the Tories gaining. A 3-5 point swing between them. The more Labour screw up the economy the more it hurts Reform as mild Reform voters will run back to the Tories just to get the economy back working properly and public spending back under control.
You think there still won't be a right wing majority by the time Labour get booted? I don't. It's creeping over 50% now in some polls.
No I don't think so, the country is probably about 50/50 if you split it that way, though yes if Labour continue to put up taxes the overall number could tip above 50% if Lib Dems and the last vestiges of Labour's private sector workers support abandons them for the Tories pledging to cut spending/tax in 2029. Especially if the Tories are seen as the best placed party to keep Reform out of government we may end up seeing some very strange bedfellows.
UK borrowing costs are expected to fall further next year, according to the average forecast from nine big investment banks, as investors increasingly price in interest rate cuts from the Bank of England (BoE) after a prolonged period of restrictive monetary policy.
Britain's 10-year bond yield, which hit a 16-year high of 4.95% at the start of 2025 — due to worries about near-record debt issuance and a global bond sell-off — is expected to come down to 4.32% by the end of 2026.
Investment baskets expect UK gilts to be the best performers amongst peer countries. They are impressed by the brilliance of Rachel Reeves budget.
It's going to be interesting in 2027/28 as I see a lot of people focus on throwing money into their pension before the 2029 NI salary sacrifice changes. Especially in 2028 I can see a lot of people having a major focus on saving...
Everyone involved in defence procurement at the MoD, with any responsibility for decision making on this program during the last decade and a half, should be put on notice. Unless they can provide good cause (for example, if they were recruited a few months ago, or they are on record as having consistently opposed the way in which Ajax has been handled), they ought to be fired.
This is a completely simplistic analysis and your proposed Nacht und Nebel in the MoD would solve nothing. It might be comforting to think that these programs might go better if only everyone were as knowledgeable, intelligent and industrious as a Daily Telegraph columnist or PB contributor. The underlying issue is these massive mega-projects have to serve multiple, diffuse and often contradictory objectives.
- Has to be built in Britain because we're the best at everything. - Has to create jobs in a politically convenient area. - The services want S-Tier equipment customised to their exact perceived needs and will leak like fuck to the Telegraph, Express, etc. if slighted. - These perceived needs change constantly over the life of the program. - The purchasing decision has to reinforce strategic alliances. (No point in buying Korean gear because we don't give a fuck what they think or want.)
The only way to improve it is to recast the purchasing decision as providing the most capability for the least money but that is (currently) politically impossible. Imagine the stink if we just had the FSS ships made in Vietnam for a third of the cost of pissing around in Belfast.
That completely ignores the multiple opportunities along the way to judge Ajax had gone wrong. And the fact that it would have been possible to build a workable system in the UK (as was offered over a decade ago) in the form of CV90.
I've already acknowledged my "solution" isn't in itself a workable plan, but your attitude is that nothing can be done better. That's just absurd and defeatist.
The choice of vehicle is irrelevant. ASCOD2 (which begat Ajax) works fine for many operators. If CV90 had been selected, it would have been customised, optimised, localised, upgraded and generally buggered about in exactly the same way Ajax has with likely similar results.
Then you buy a large ruler and whack anyone suggesting "unique British requirements" over the knuckles. Strangely, other countries manage to live with CV90, just as it is.
Though it has had multiple different variants over the years, some customised to country requirements.
UK borrowing costs are expected to fall further next year, according to the average forecast from nine big investment banks, as investors increasingly price in interest rate cuts from the Bank of England (BoE) after a prolonged period of restrictive monetary policy.
Britain's 10-year bond yield, which hit a 16-year high of 4.95% at the start of 2025 — due to worries about near-record debt issuance and a global bond sell-off — is expected to come down to 4.32% by the end of 2026.
Investment baskets expect UK gilts to be the best performers amongst peer countries. They are impressed by the brilliance of Rachel Reeves budget.
“It’s not clear who attacked whom,” Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán said today at a presser on the Russia–Ukraine war, after an EU summit where he opposed any financial help for Ukraine.. https://x.com/panyiszabolcs/status/2002066328321229172
“It’s not clear who attacked whom,” Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán said today at a presser on the Russia–Ukraine war, after an EU summit where he opposed any financial help for Ukraine.. https://x.com/panyiszabolcs/status/2002066328321229172
TBF, to somebody of very limited intellect that may be true.
UK borrowing costs are expected to fall further next year, according to the average forecast from nine big investment banks, as investors increasingly price in interest rate cuts from the Bank of England (BoE) after a prolonged period of restrictive monetary policy.
Britain's 10-year bond yield, which hit a 16-year high of 4.95% at the start of 2025 — due to worries about near-record debt issuance and a global bond sell-off — is expected to come down to 4.32% by the end of 2026.
Investment baskets expect UK gilts to be the best performers amongst peer countries. They are impressed by the brilliance of Rachel Reeves budget.
But that's with 1pp of base rate cuts by the BoE from beginning of 2025 to the end of 2026 being priced in. This doesn't strike me as very good news. If we compare our current debt yields to what they were the last time the base rate was 3.75%. At the end of January 2023 when the BoE put rates up the 10Y yield was ~3.3% and that's after the Trussterfuck which burned so much of our national fiscal and monetary credibility plus substantially higher inflation.
What's actualy happening is thay the BoE is cutting the base rate which is expected to drop to between 3-3.25% by the end of 2026 and the government is seeing little to no benefit from that as debt markets continue price in a big risk premium.
I don't think falling debt yields are going to save the government. They will be back in November next year begging for more money to pay off striking public sector workers and to put welfare payments up again.
“It’s not clear who attacked whom,” Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán said today at a presser on the Russia–Ukraine war, after an EU summit where he opposed any financial help for Ukraine.. https://x.com/panyiszabolcs/status/2002066328321229172
TBF, to somebody of very limited intellect that may be true.
UK borrowing costs are expected to fall further next year, according to the average forecast from nine big investment banks, as investors increasingly price in interest rate cuts from the Bank of England (BoE) after a prolonged period of restrictive monetary policy.
Britain's 10-year bond yield, which hit a 16-year high of 4.95% at the start of 2025 — due to worries about near-record debt issuance and a global bond sell-off — is expected to come down to 4.32% by the end of 2026.
Investment baskets expect UK gilts to be the best performers amongst peer countries. They are impressed by the brilliance of Rachel Reeves budget.
But that's with 1pp of base rate cuts by the BoE from beginning of 2025 to the end of 2026 being priced in. This doesn't strike me as very good news. If we compare our current debt yields to what they were the last time the base rate was 3.75%. At the end of January 2023 when the BoE put rates up the 10Y yield was ~3.3% and that's after the Trussterfuck which burned so much of our national fiscal and monetary credibility plus substantially higher inflation.
What's actualy happening is thay the BoE is cutting the base rate which is expected to drop to between 3-3.25% by the end of 2026 and the government is seeing little to no benefit from that as debt markets continue price in a big risk premium.
I don't think falling debt yields are going to save the government. They will be back in November next year begging for more money to pay off striking public sector workers and to put welfare payments up again.
“It’s not clear who attacked whom,” Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán said today at a presser on the Russia–Ukraine war, after an EU summit where he opposed any financial help for Ukraine.. https://x.com/panyiszabolcs/status/2002066328321229172
TBF, to somebody of very limited intellect that may be true.
I'm not sure even Orban is that stupud.
Well, he's in effect either admitting to being stupid or to being a traitor.
UK borrowing costs are expected to fall further next year, according to the average forecast from nine big investment banks, as investors increasingly price in interest rate cuts from the Bank of England (BoE) after a prolonged period of restrictive monetary policy.
Britain's 10-year bond yield, which hit a 16-year high of 4.95% at the start of 2025 — due to worries about near-record debt issuance and a global bond sell-off — is expected to come down to 4.32% by the end of 2026.
Investment baskets expect UK gilts to be the best performers amongst peer countries. They are impressed by the brilliance of Rachel Reeves budget.
But that's with 1pp of base rate cuts by the BoE from beginning of 2025 to the end of 2026 being priced in. This doesn't strike me as very good news. If we compare our current debt yields to what they were the last time the base rate was 3.75%. At the end of January 2023 when the BoE put rates up the 10Y yield was ~3.3% and that's after the Trussterfuck which burned so much of our national fiscal and monetary credibility plus substantially higher inflation.
What's actualy happening is thay the BoE is cutting the base rate which is expected to drop to between 3-3.25% by the end of 2026 and the government is seeing little to no benefit from that as debt markets continue price in a big risk premium.
I don't think falling debt yields are going to save the government. They will be back in November next year begging for more money to pay off striking public sector workers and to put welfare payments up again.
UK borrowing costs are expected to fall further next year, according to the average forecast from nine big investment banks, as investors increasingly price in interest rate cuts from the Bank of England (BoE) after a prolonged period of restrictive monetary policy.
Britain's 10-year bond yield, which hit a 16-year high of 4.95% at the start of 2025 — due to worries about near-record debt issuance and a global bond sell-off — is expected to come down to 4.32% by the end of 2026.
Investment baskets expect UK gilts to be the best performers amongst peer countries. They are impressed by the brilliance of Rachel Reeves budget.
But that's with 1pp of base rate cuts by the BoE from beginning of 2025 to the end of 2026 being priced in. This doesn't strike me as very good news. If we compare our current debt yields to what they were the last time the base rate was 3.75%. At the end of January 2023 when the BoE put rates up the 10Y yield was ~3.3% and that's after the Trussterfuck which burned so much of our national fiscal and monetary credibility plus substantially higher inflation.
What's actualy happening is thay the BoE is cutting the base rate which is expected to drop to between 3-3.25% by the end of 2026 and the government is seeing little to no benefit from that as debt markets continue price in a big risk premium.
I don't think falling debt yields are going to save the government. They will be back in November next year begging for more money to pay off striking public sector workers and to put welfare payments up again.
Somewhat belatedly, it is time to go and get the Christmas tree. Then put some decs up. Our son is coming home in the early hours for Christmas. Looking forward to that.
This has been a very unhappy hear for me in politics. I feel an orphan. I have nothing but contempt for the SNP government in Scotland and I am in despair about the Labour government in London. My enthusiasm and even interest has waned sharply. I may have a break from PB for a while.
We're in a dull phase right now.
That's certainly part of the problem. Sometimes, as with the bug going round at the moment, the only answer is to hunker down and wait for nature to do its thing. The current personnel aren't ideal casting, sure. But if the alternatives are worse, what are we to do?
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
Besides, how did we get here and then get out? Part of the problem, I'm sure, is that we're demanding leadership qualities that go well beyond what we have any right to demand. Since Blair, we've had seven PMs, all of whom failed fairly unambiguously and fairly quickly. What was the sliding door moment where we could have avoided all this?
Unfair on Cameron. PM for seven years, led the best government of the last twenty years. Made one tiny miscalculation…
Cameron's “best government of the last twenty years” flatlined the economy, gerrymandered our electoral process (which arguably resulted in losing the referendum), broke the NHS (which is why there was no support for Lansley over plebgate), almost lost Scotland and did lose Europe.
Almost lost Scotland? The result was NO 55%.
Closer than initially predicted by many.
Not as close as Brexit, not as close as Wales '97!
Wales '97 was 50.3% yes to devolution, 49.7% no to devolution.
100 losers in a room needs, to reflect each result:
124 unionists;
108 leavers;
101 anti-devolutionists.
Scottish referendum wasn't close.
You had me until the last line. I was expecting 'And a partridge in a pear tree'.
Christmas themes abound. Wordle today, for example. Still got it in three.
Acyn @Acyn · 54m Tapper: This is one of the documents the DOJ released. It’s 100 pages. It’s all black. That’s the transparency we’re getting.
====
Surely the conspiracy theories will go to 11 now if most what comes out is redacted????
Beyond that, it's a blatant violation of the law passed by Congress mandating the files should be released.
Fox News is reporting that Fox News Digital has learned that the same redaction standards applied to Jeffrey Epstein victims were also applied to politically exposed individuals and government officials.
EXC: Morgan McSweeney’s mission statement for 2026 - “the year Britain turns a corner” and “starts to feel the difference” - government is “not technocratic” (despite what Wes said) - Farage and Reform are a “moral abomination” with “pockets filled with Russian money”
Acyn @Acyn · 54m Tapper: This is one of the documents the DOJ released. It’s 100 pages. It’s all black. That’s the transparency we’re getting.
====
Surely the conspiracy theories will go to 11 now if most what comes out is redacted????
Beyond that, it's a blatant violation of the law passed by Congress mandating the files should be released.
And Congress will do nothing about it, and nor will the courts.
This is why there is no backlog of court cases. Lammy could have avoided the 'no jury' controversy by just telling the courts not to give a f**k. Much more streamlined.
EXC: Morgan McSweeney’s mission statement for 2026 - “the year Britain turns a corner” and “starts to feel the difference” - government is “not technocratic” (despite what Wes said) - Farage and Reform are a “moral abomination” with “pockets filled with Russian money”
Acyn @Acyn · 54m Tapper: This is one of the documents the DOJ released. It’s 100 pages. It’s all black. That’s the transparency we’re getting.
====
Surely the conspiracy theories will go to 11 now if most what comes out is redacted????
Beyond that, it's a blatant violation of the law passed by Congress mandating the files should be released.
And Congress will do nothing about it, and nor will the courts.
Well the DOJ certainly isn't going to indict anyone...
This is a worse coverup than Watergate.
It's so blatant a display of contempt of Congress - and for a significant slice of Trump's own supporters - that it makes worried that there won't be elections next year.
NEWS: Today, Trump signed an executive order committing the United States to return to the Moon by 2028, build a lunar outpost by 2030 and prepare for the journey to Mars.
NEWS: Today, Trump signed an executive order committing the United States to return to the Moon by 2028, build a lunar outpost by 2030 and prepare for the journey to Mars.
NEWS: Today, Trump signed an executive order committing the United States to return to the Moon by 2028, build a lunar outpost by 2030 and prepare for the journey to Mars.
If the united states would just feck off to the moon, it would hopefully reduce the amount of commentary I need to suffer about whatever random sh*t they're upto today.
NEWS: Today, Trump signed an executive order committing the United States to return to the Moon by 2028, build a lunar outpost by 2030 and prepare for the journey to Mars.
It looks like the initially redacted copy of the MP's Expenses in 2009, before they were sold to the Telegraph, but even worse.
I think the law requires an account of redaction decisions, so it will be challenged, and perhaps reviewed in camera by a Judge. It could even be Judge Boasberg, depending on where the lot falls.
Somewhat belatedly, it is time to go and get the Christmas tree. Then put some decs up. Our son is coming home in the early hours for Christmas. Looking forward to that.
This has been a very unhappy hear for me in politics. I feel an orphan. I have nothing but contempt for the SNP government in Scotland and I am in despair about the Labour government in London. My enthusiasm and even interest has waned sharply. I may have a break from PB for a while.
We're in a dull phase right now.
That's certainly part of the problem. Sometimes, as with the bug going round at the moment, the only answer is to hunker down and wait for nature to do its thing. The current personnel aren't ideal casting, sure. But if the alternatives are worse, what are we to do?
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
Besides, how did we get here and then get out? Part of the problem, I'm sure, is that we're demanding leadership qualities that go well beyond what we have any right to demand. Since Blair, we've had seven PMs, all of whom failed fairly unambiguously and fairly quickly. What was the sliding door moment where we could have avoided all this?
Unfair on Cameron. PM for seven years, led the best government of the last twenty years. Made one tiny miscalculation…
Cameron's “best government of the last twenty years” flatlined the economy, gerrymandered our electoral process (which arguably resulted in losing the referendum), broke the NHS (which is why there was no support for Lansley over plebgate), almost lost Scotland and did lose Europe.
Lansley wasn’t plebgate, surely? I think the coalition set the national finances on the road to recovery. If you look around, most western governments have flatlined since 2007. What Gerrymandering are you refering too?
Good point. Two people with the same first name. Deliberate mistake. AI slop. Autocorrect.
Until Osborne, we'd been largely tracking America's economy. Ours was recovering by the time of the election.
Gerrymandering. Cameron, Osborne and CCHQ generally had become convinced Labour had an unfair advantage, partly because they did not understand the notion of efficient vote spread, so needed to put their own thumb on the scale. Mainly this was done, in a ruse copied by the Republicans in America, by purging the electoral rolls and making registration harder, and then redrawing boundaries based on the new rolls, so that more seats were created in traditional Conservative areas than Labour ones. By also reducing the number of seats, they ensured every boundary had to be reconsidered. There was more to it than that but you get the gist.
So you believe that the electoral commission is biased? Because surely they are responsible for boundaries etc? And as for making registration harder? I get a letter that I have to log on and confirm or make changes. Pretty sure there are other ways too. It’s not rocket science.
No, the Conservatives rolled the pitch so the unbiased EC would create a biased result.
It's early out but I think I'm going to base my early betting strategy on this vote share in 2029:
C - 27 L - 19 R - 21 LD - 15 G - 12
I think we're going to end up with a Con/Ref coalition after the election. My gut feeling is that the "punishment" narrative that the media pushed so hard against the Tories last time has gone away and people just aren't responding to Labour's attempts to blame the current economic fuck ups on the previous government and they are taking the majority of the blame for falling jobs, higher inflation and falling investment because of their tax rise agenda.
I also think that by the time 2029 rolls around Labour will have gone through at least two more rounds of tax rises and working age people will be fed up and be willing to give the Tories a go just on the basis of cutting spending and stopping taxes from rising to pay for welfare.
Interesting but optimistic and would require a lot more Reform voters to switch to the Conservatives,
On those numbers the Conservatives would likely win a small majority and even if only most seats would govern as a minority government not with Reform
Surely Reform and the Tories may cancel each other out? The Lib Dems may have a lower share of the vote, but it is very concentrated. You could certainly see further gains for Sir Ed on those numbers.
Somewhat belatedly, it is time to go and get the Christmas tree. Then put some decs up. Our son is coming home in the early hours for Christmas. Looking forward to that.
This has been a very unhappy hear for me in politics. I feel an orphan. I have nothing but contempt for the SNP government in Scotland and I am in despair about the Labour government in London. My enthusiasm and even interest has waned sharply. I may have a break from PB for a while.
We're in a dull phase right now.
That's certainly part of the problem. Sometimes, as with the bug going round at the moment, the only answer is to hunker down and wait for nature to do its thing. The current personnel aren't ideal casting, sure. But if the alternatives are worse, what are we to do?
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
Besides, how did we get here and then get out? Part of the problem, I'm sure, is that we're demanding leadership qualities that go well beyond what we have any right to demand. Since Blair, we've had seven PMs, all of whom failed fairly unambiguously and fairly quickly. What was the sliding door moment where we could have avoided all this?
Unfair on Cameron. PM for seven years, led the best government of the last twenty years. Made one tiny miscalculation…
Cameron's “best government of the last twenty years” flatlined the economy, gerrymandered our electoral process (which arguably resulted in losing the referendum), broke the NHS (which is why there was no support for Lansley over plebgate), almost lost Scotland and did lose Europe.
Lansley wasn’t plebgate, surely? I think the coalition set the national finances on the road to recovery. If you look around, most western governments have flatlined since 2007. What Gerrymandering are you refering too?
Good point. Two people with the same first name. Deliberate mistake. AI slop. Autocorrect.
Until Osborne, we'd been largely tracking America's economy. Ours was recovering by the time of the election.
Gerrymandering. Cameron, Osborne and CCHQ generally had become convinced Labour had an unfair advantage, partly because they did not understand the notion of efficient vote spread, so needed to put their own thumb on the scale. Mainly this was done, in a ruse copied by the Republicans in America, by purging the electoral rolls and making registration harder, and then redrawing boundaries based on the new rolls, so that more seats were created in traditional Conservative areas than Labour ones. By also reducing the number of seats, they ensured every boundary had to be reconsidered. There was more to it than that but you get the gist.
So you believe that the electoral commission is biased? Because surely they are responsible for boundaries etc? And as for making registration harder? I get a letter that I have to log on and confirm or make changes. Pretty sure there are other ways too. It’s not rocket science.
No, the Conservatives rolled the pitch so the unbiased EC would create a biased result.
You are aware that Blair/Gordon Brown delayed re-districting, precisely because it would swing the pendulum away from Labour?
“It’s not clear who attacked whom,” Hungarian PM Viktor Orbán said today at a presser on the Russia–Ukraine war, after an EU summit where he opposed any financial help for Ukraine.. https://x.com/panyiszabolcs/status/2002066328321229172
Later, Ursula von der Leyen punched Orban in the face, saying “It’s not clear who attacked whom.”
Not that impactful, but a good summary of the issue. Farage has always been careful not to overstep the line but he associates with some very dodgy people
UK borrowing costs are expected to fall further next year, according to the average forecast from nine big investment banks, as investors increasingly price in interest rate cuts from the Bank of England (BoE) after a prolonged period of restrictive monetary policy.
Britain's 10-year bond yield, which hit a 16-year high of 4.95% at the start of 2025 — due to worries about near-record debt issuance and a global bond sell-off — is expected to come down to 4.32% by the end of 2026.
Investment bankers expect UK gilts to be the best performers amongst peer countries. They are impressed by the brilliance of Rachel Reeves budget.
There is clearly stuff in the Epstein files of significance.
This presumably wasn't redacted as it's from when Clinton was in power. It's more evidence that the covering up of Epstein's crimes went back years. The FBI previously denied this woman ever made a complaint.
Maria has been accused over the years of fabricating her story that she had gone to the FBI. After finding the document in the trove, I called her. She broke down in tears.
Comments
Just today I read that expectations are that 1/8 working age adults will be on some kind of disability benefit by the time of the election because Labour didn't cut welfare and restrict welfare access to spurious claimants who are a bit sad or "anxious" and get coaching on how to get signed off for benefits. There's no way that Labour don't come back for more money. They are incapable of not spending and there's no magical growth coming to balance the budget for them.
https://x.com/bydonkeys/status/2002060725301518612
And as for making registration harder? I get a letter that I have to log on and confirm or make changes. Pretty sure there are other ways too. It’s not rocket science.
And the fact that it would have been possible to build a workable system in the UK (as was offered over a decade ago) in the form of CV90.
I've already acknowledged my "solution" isn't in itself a workable plan, but your attitude is that nothing can be done better.
That's just absurd and defeatist.
Sadly they didn't..
Mind you I would prefer a Tory Government than a Reform one - heck Monster Raving Looney would be better than Reform...
I remember posting extensively on here suggesting that the official data seemed to be out of step with what I and many others were seeing out in the real world and I also remember getting shouted down by the same usual suspects that speaking to real people and "anecdata" was no substitute for official data. As it turned out I was right and the ONS was wrong, the UK exited the COVID recession the fastest of any major European nation and grew faster post-COVID than comparable European countries too but the ONS had just completely fucked it and understated key sectors while overstating the impact of state output.
It's just a feeling and it's just conversations with people, though I think the Tory party has turned a corner. Labour opened the door and I don't think they know how to close it again because they are unable to cut spending and keep taxes down.
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/monthly-gdp-yoy
Waterloo Station
Every Friday night.
---
Don't tell June.
- do we have the domestic factory/skills for it already?
- if not, buy an *existing* foreign design in enough quantity that as part of the deal, they set up a factory here.
- this creates the skills, automatically.
So if you want to setup a huge factory to make batteries for electric vehicles, make a huge order from someone like Panasonic, with setting up the factory in Northumberland (or wherever) part of the deal. This creates an in country skill pool of people who work in battery factories, build them, run them.
This approach has created industries in many, many countries around the world.
It seems to me there is no single direction of the relevant electoral forces, and that the contradictions will have to work themselves out over time. 2026 will be a fascinating year.
Tories: Yes, they are less written off than they were. But the 'right' vote (Con + Reform) won't in totality get to more than about 50% total. So for the Tories to do well, Reform must do badly. Labour being terrible (they are) isn't enough, and Labour being terrible feeds Reform as it shows 'they are all the same'.
Labour: They are terrible but a change of leader looks certain to most people (I am agnostic). If that happens, all bets are off. Further, though they are terrible, there is, unlike on the 'right', no one group on the left/centre left that looks like being able to eat them. Which gives them a stable ground for recovery on the old basis: payroll vote, urban vote, BAME vote, benefits vote, public sector vote, keep Tories and Reform out vote and so on. Labour's recovery is not dependent on the balance of the Tory/Reform battle. Both groups, left and right, have about half the votes each.
With Booker cancelled, there are basically Spain and Austria.
In contrast CV90 is one of the standard systems across Europe.
But you are entirely correct about the nexus between unrealistic service wish lists, MoD procurement, political indecision, uncertain defence budgets - and general dishonesty about things going wrong.
It's the latter which is the most glaring deficiency on the Ajax program, and what people deserve to be sacked for.
First I have ever heard of this legal power.
Oh for the days when the police unions thought it was ok to lie in sworn testimony to bring down a government minister
Okay, so I looked this up. The legislation was passed at Westminster, but all the parties agreed to it, because there was a recommendation not to have elections with different voting systems on the same day. Clegg did offer that the Holyrood elections could have been brought forward a year, but the choice was made to delay instead.
For the next election it was the Scottish government that chose to delay to 2021 to avoid a clash with the Westminster election that was due in 2020 (after the 2015 general election). So, again, this was not imposed on Scotland, and it changed the default term of a Scottish Parliament to five years. By legislation passed at Holyrood.
Why do ScotNats always have to blame everything on Westminster when they've done the thing themselves? It's not like we can't check.
Lot of choc boxes sold out.
On the Tory/Reform share I agree, I think between them they'll end up on 46-49% with Reform weakening over the next three years and the Tories gaining. A 3-5 point swing between them. The more Labour screw up the economy the more it hurts Reform as mild Reform voters will run back to the Tories just to get the economy back working properly and public spending back under control.
'Simplistic' is an overused word that is usually deployed to decry any analysis that is actually just 'simple', as if its simplicity were an inherent demerit. These people should be sacked. If and when that 'simplistic' solution fails, something more complex might be needed.
If the Right bloc splits something like Reform 26 Con 24, the Conservatives are very much in the game. If it's 28, 22, they are done for.
But let's move on: I'm against cancelling elections. Even if it is one year.
UK borrowing costs are expected to fall further next year, according to the average forecast from nine big investment banks, as investors increasingly price in interest rate cuts from the Bank of England (BoE) after a prolonged period of restrictive monetary policy.
Britain's 10-year bond yield, which hit a 16-year high of 4.95% at the start of 2025 — due to worries about near-record debt issuance and a global bond sell-off — is expected to come down to 4.32% by the end of 2026.
Investment bankers expect UK gilts to be the best performers amongst peer countries. They are impressed by the brilliance of Rachel Reeves budget.
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/bond-market-2026-060013107.html
https://x.com/panyiszabolcs/status/2002066328321229172
What they have released is also very heavily redacted:
https://x.com/krassenstein/status/2002123706504785966
What's actualy happening is thay the BoE is cutting the base rate which is expected to drop to between 3-3.25% by the end of 2026 and the government is seeing little to no benefit from that as debt markets continue price in a big risk premium.
I don't think falling debt yields are going to save the government. They will be back in November next year begging for more money to pay off striking public sector workers and to put welfare payments up again.
https://www.justice.gov/epstein/files/DataSet 4/EFTA00006209.pdf
Absolute joke.
That swamp sure is being drained.
@Acyn
·
54m
Tapper: This is one of the documents the DOJ released. It’s 100 pages. It’s all black. That’s the transparency we’re getting.
====
Surely the conspiracy theories will go to 11 now if most what comes out is redacted????
She wont be presenting or writing the 2026 Budget, so who actually cares what her thoughts are?
Alex
@venturewriter
·
36m
The reason they did not release all Epstein files today is they ran out of black ink in DOJ.
Bill Kristol
@BillKristol
·
1h
Wonder if Liz Cheney could run as an independent for Senate in WY?
https://x.com/BillKristol/status/2002131890820821106
Fox News is reporting that Fox News Digital has learned that the same redaction standards applied to Jeffrey Epstein victims were also applied to politically exposed individuals and government officials.
In other words, they redacted politician names, except apparently for Bill Clinton.
https://x.com/EdKrassen/status/2002149202164658651
@patrickkmaguire
EXC: Morgan McSweeney’s mission statement for 2026
- “the year Britain turns a corner” and “starts to feel the difference”
- government is “not technocratic” (despite what Wes said)
- Farage and Reform are a “moral abomination” with “pockets filled with Russian money”
https://x.com/patrickkmaguire/status/2002115425375842711
So, that's ok.
Probably, this all works out ok. Maybe a world war or two - but in the end, it'll all be fine? Everything is fine?
This is a worse coverup than Watergate.
It's so blatant a display of contempt of Congress - and for a significant slice of Trump's own supporters - that it makes worried that there won't be elections next year.
Sawyer Merritt
@SawyerMerritt
NEWS: Today, Trump signed an executive order committing the United States to return to the Moon by 2028, build a lunar outpost by 2030 and prepare for the journey to Mars.
https://x.com/SawyerMerritt/status/2001787324384862401
Like.... seriously. How did he have time for all the ne'er-do-well when he had that much admin to do?
For a second time tonight, I'm remembering The Thick of It :
That's the thing about the Evil - they have this great work ethic
I think the law requires an account of redaction decisions, so it will be challenged, and perhaps reviewed in camera by a Judge. It could even be Judge Boasberg, depending on where the lot falls.
That was what the WSJ when he sued them for $10bn for publishing his birthday naked young woman doodle.
What's the future tense of TACO? Presumably something like TACABET.
My work here is nearly done
https://x.com/thomasknox/status/2002164473759400384?s=46&t=CW4pL-mMpTqsJXCdjW0Z6Q
England can win this...
England can win this..
Utter filth from the BBC at this hour in the morning
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/cricket/live/cqxzewxepn1t#Scorecard
How do we challenge members of the House of Lords who use their platform to insert (knowingly or not) misinformation into the national debate?
(This is from my beat but it's a wider question.)
Not that impactful, but a good summary of the issue. Farage has always been careful not to overstep the line but he associates with some very dodgy people
I'm putting the Daily Mail down as a ‘maybe’.
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/yUzEk4Ch1zk
This presumably wasn't redacted as it's from when Clinton was in power. It's more evidence that the covering up of Epstein's crimes went back years. The FBI previously denied this woman ever made a complaint.
Maria has been accused over the years of fabricating her story that she had gone to the FBI. After finding the document in the trove, I called her. She broke down in tears.
“I’ve waited 30 years. I can’t believe it. They can’t call me a liar anymore.”
https://x.com/ByMikeBaker/status/2002165820781363465