There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
The problem was the profits were not used to build replacement homes not with right to buy itself
The problem is nothing to do with right to buy.
The problem is planning.
The houses sold with right to buy still exist. The problem is our population has increased by over ten million people, and our demographics changed to need more houses per capita, and we have not constructed remotely enough houses as people object to new buildings.
The problem is not planning. Sure, more houses would be good but it isn’t going to happen. You are being naive.
Planning is being identified as a problem by developers as it is a cost. Developers don’t give a shit about the built environment or infrastructure. We need planning.
And to be clear.
There are 1.5 million unbuilt houses in developer land banks. Prices will never ever drop while the private sector is controlling the housing supply. And it does.
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
The problem was the profits were not used to build replacement homes not with right to buy itself
The problem is nothing to do with right to buy.
The problem is planning.
The houses sold with right to buy still exist. The problem is our population has increased by over ten million people, and our demographics changed to need more houses per capita, and we have not constructed remotely enough houses as people object to new buildings.
The problem is not planning. Sure, more houses would be good but it isn’t going to happen. You are being naive.
Planning is being identified as a problem by developers as it is a cost. Developers don’t give a shit about the built environment or infrastructure. We need planning.
And to be clear.
There are 1.5 million unbuilt houses in developer land banks. Prices will never ever drop while the private sector is controlling the housing supply. And it does.
Developers who landbank too long should be fined
I do agree, but there must also be some regulatory/tax changes we can make to incentivise productive use of land rather than sitting on it and letting it appreciate. For the latter to be more lucrative than the former has to wrong.
But who will be the next leader to be replaced if not Kemi? Sir Keir is under attack but there is no real mechanism to oust him, although I think he will retire anyway.
I'm not convinced about "retires without being ousted", unless you mean to include in that "is practically speaking forced to resign but doesn't formally lose a leadership contest". Post-war, Wikipedia tells me there were some Tory PMs who resigned due to illness in the 50s and 60s, Harold Wilson seems to have resigned of his own accord (possibly with a side order of health issues), and we could argue whether Cameron was forced out or chose to resign, but everyone else I think was either effectively ousted or lost an election. Starmer is 63, which is older than I thought, but he hasn't been successful in politics long enough to develop Wilson's "been around this racetrack so often that I cannot generate any more enthusiasm" weariness. So I think that the most likely thing is that he'll continue to the next election, because as you say Labour doesn't have the mechanisms and enthusiasm for toppling leaders that the Tories do.
I think Starmer will follow Wilson in retiring with, as you put it, a side order of health issues. Aside from that, Starmer is already our oldest Prime Minister since Mrs Thatcher and if he were to stay till 2029 would be the oldest since Jim Callaghan; Starmer is used to this era where PMs serve just two or three years (Brown, May, Boris, Truss, Rishi) and will not have the vanity to reach for ten like Blair or Thatcher.
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
The problem was the profits were not used to build replacement homes not with right to buy itself
The problem is nothing to do with right to buy.
The problem is planning.
The houses sold with right to buy still exist. The problem is our population has increased by over ten million people, and our demographics changed to need more houses per capita, and we have not constructed remotely enough houses as people object to new buildings.
The problem is not planning. Sure, more houses would be good but it isn’t going to happen. You are being naive.
Planning is being identified as a problem by developers as it is a cost. Developers don’t give a shit about the built environment or infrastructure. We need planning.
And to be clear.
There are 1.5 million unbuilt houses in developer land banks. Prices will never ever drop while the private sector is controlling the housing supply. And it does.
Developers who landbank too long should be fined
Charge council tax, at the unoccupied house rate, from one year after PP is given.
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
The problem was the profits were not used to build replacement homes not with right to buy itself
The problem is nothing to do with right to buy.
The problem is planning.
The houses sold with right to buy still exist. The problem is our population has increased by over ten million people, and our demographics changed to need more houses per capita, and we have not constructed remotely enough houses as people object to new buildings.
The problem is not planning. Sure, more houses would be good but it isn’t going to happen. You are being naive.
Planning is being identified as a problem by developers as it is a cost. Developers don’t give a shit about the built environment or infrastructure. We need planning.
And to be clear.
There are 1.5 million unbuilt houses in developer land banks. Prices will never ever drop while the private sector is controlling the housing supply. And it does.
Developers who landbank too long should be fined
I agree, although you wouldn't think, from experience in this part of Essex, that there's much land banking going on. Massive estate being built between us and the A12, and a substantial one recently built locally.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
Morning HYUFD,
I'm not so bullish over Labour in Scotland, they aren't polling as well as pre Hamilton, recent by elections in working class areas were poor for them. Right now they are losing voters to Reform and only slightly more competitive in white collar areas, and they are up against a party with only 1 MSP and effectively no Scottish leader.
Sarwar needs a very clear message and to take the fight on all flanks, to Reform, SNP and the wider electorate. It's easier said than done. He is going hard on the NHS, but needs to attack the SNPs record more. I don't share the view that Labour are heading for multiple gains over the SNP, they have both dropped, but Slabs vote has been squeezed more. Mr Starmer could find himself in big trouble once the votes are all counted up here. It all could change though
Hi C. Noticed you namechecking Winchcombe recently. You a local, or were you just passing through?
Me? Winchcombe? Not me, must have been someone else who mentioned it.
But I have been there, aeons ago. Dim memory of visiting on a student days tour with the archaeological handbook and CAMRA guide, very necessary in those days of fizzy keg ale.
Somebody posted a pic from StPeter's Church, Winchcombe, which I can see from my back garden. Not you? Sorry, my mistake.
I know PB reaches far and wide but Winchcombe is a town of just 6,000 people so I would be surprised if we had two representatives here.
No worries. Friends used to live not far away and I got to know something of that area. Broadway, the Vale, the Malvern Hills ...
We're about 20 miles south of Broadway, which is dangerously close to ScottP, but he is safely beyond the Worcestershire border. I believe that passport control has his number and his visits to Gloucestershire are therefore confined to the National Hunt Festival.
And of course the Three Counties Showground!
Are you a member?
No, just been to a memorable show there long ago. Fine views of the hills, I seem to recall.
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
The problem was the profits were not used to build replacement homes not with right to buy itself
Not sure I agree on the second point. The good houses got creamed off. A lot of poor people ended up being trapped in crap houses/estates in failing towns. It's not all about the Southeast when it comes to bribing voters - rather, those voters in the North often ended up being negatively bribed.
But on your first point, quite so.
For many working class people owning a home for the first time after they bought their council property was a huge source of pride and driver of social mobility and expanded property ownership
But for too many it was the reverse. They couldn't escape. They should not be forgotten in your hype and froth.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
As noted by TSE Twitter has reverted to pushing folk into the 'for you' feed as default. For me this morning it was this particulary unconvincing attempt at 'I'm not a cnut, honest'.
A good family man picture of Jenrick, similar to what US Presidential candidates might do. Just a nice modest picture of him with his girls for Christmas though I am sure, as he of course definitely has no leadership ambitions anymore and thinks Kemi is a wonderful leader
Jenrick has a dilemma. For most of the past year, the thinking on the right was that Kemi would be ousted and that a replacement would be needed who could reach a pact with Reform and who could be the first Cambridge-educated Prime Minister since Stanley Baldwin (see, I do read these threads). But now Kemi is on the upswing.
But who will be the next leader to be replaced if not Kemi? Sir Keir is under attack but there is no real mechanism to oust him, although I think he will retire anyway. But look at the discussion around better relations with the EU, Erasmus, a possible customs union and ask what of the dog who has not barked in the night time. Is Nigel Farage losing interest in politics? He is rarely sighted in Clacton or the House of Commons.
So should Jenrick defect to Reform in hope of an early leadership election? The trouble there is that man of the people Danny Kruger has beaten him to it. Still, he would almost certainly get a Cabinet post if the balloon does not pop.
Farage isn't going to lose interest while Reform are polling so high, it's more a case of when/whether his financial and media backers decide to switch back to the Conservatives.
Reform is turning into an openly racist party these days. I wonder if the Conservatives could exploit the just-about-plausible deniability market?
Provided people have short memories, and they do, there’s space to be the “quietly competent economically literate, and non-racist, let’s have some hope for the future” party.
That isn’t Kemi though.
Yep. The Tories USP, the reason they win more elections than they lose, is 'better with the £££ than Labour'. It's a default assumption of the electorate, all the more powerful for being based on brand perception rather than dry facts and figures. They lost this USP with Truss (which is why that episode was so disastrous for them) and they won't win again until they get it back. Corollary: when they do get it back they will win again. Can this happen as quickly as the next election? Yes, it can. Truss will be 7 years ago by then. I'd never written them off and I certainly don't do so now. They are live outsiders not no-hopers.
What has to happen for them? Two things above all else: Labour to succeed on immigration and fail on the economy. They need immigration to fall in salience because if that's the election issue Reform will win. The Tories need the election issue to be the £££. Specifically they need the economy and public finances to deteriorate from here rather than improve. If this happens, doesn't matter why, and they can retrieve that USP (ie it proves strong enough to withstand the Trussterfuck), I give them a good chance of returning to power (as largest party anyway) next time.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Objectively the going is good for them, but somehow they just don't get the pulse racing and so progress tends to be stealthy rather than dramatic. This does however give them a solid base that is not vulnerable to fads.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
Morning HYUFD,
I'm not so bullish over Labour in Scotland, they aren't polling as well as pre Hamilton, recent by elections in working class areas were poor for them. Right now they are losing voters to Reform and only slightly more competitive in white collar areas, and they are up against a party with only 1 MSP and effectively no Scottish leader.
Sarwar needs a very clear message and to take the fight on all flanks, to Reform, SNP and the wider electorate. It's easier said than done. He is going hard on the NHS, but needs to attack the SNPs record more. I don't share the view that Labour are heading for multiple gains over the SNP, they have both dropped, but Slabs vote has been squeezed more. Mr Starmer could find himself in big trouble once the votes are all counted up here. It all could change though
Once the true facts of Buggate emerge, the SNP are finished.
That's an overstatement, I'm afraid; Kenneth Robinson, Harold Wilson's first one, was widely held to be excellent.
In response to Mr eek's statement that: All Heath Secretaries fail - it's a complete impossible job that is all downsides with zero chance of an upside...
Hunt seemed to manage it.
Hunt followed Andrew Lansley who was widely. and as far as I know correctly, held to be a catastrophic health minister. It was impossible for Hunt not to be an "upside".
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
It's why I always cycle in the centre of the lane in the middle of the city. I don't know if there are criminal proceedings against the woman - not sure if that is even possible.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Objectively the going is good for them, but somehow they just don't get the pulse racing and so progress tends to be stealthy rather than dramatic. This does however give them a solid base that is not vulnerable to fads.
The hard part will be deciding what to do if the prospect of a coalition emerges for them. Take it but insist on PR I guess?
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
Morning HYUFD,
I'm not so bullish over Labour in Scotland, they aren't polling as well as pre Hamilton, recent by elections in working class areas were poor for them. Right now they are losing voters to Reform and only slightly more competitive in white collar areas, and they are up against a party with only 1 MSP and effectively no Scottish leader.
Sarwar needs a very clear message and to take the fight on all flanks, to Reform, SNP and the wider electorate. It's easier said than done. He is going hard on the NHS, but needs to attack the SNPs record more. I don't share the view that Labour are heading for multiple gains over the SNP, they have both dropped, but Slabs vote has been squeezed more. Mr Starmer could find himself in big trouble once the votes are all counted up here. It all could change though
Once the true facts of Buggate emerge, the SNP are finished.
At the moment it's a nothingburger of a story, both complex and supposedly already resolved in Employment Tribunals.
Now the SNP probably shouldn't be given the right to run a whelk stall but that's on Scottish voters to decide.
First one Russian general finds himself liquidated with a Moscow car bomb, and now video emerges of two Russian fighter jets taken out by partisans well inside Russia.
The Kremlin must now be thinking they have a severe problem with Ukranian actors on Russian soil, it’s not just the drones any more.
Well, if Russia will continue abducting Ukrainians who have no intention of becoming Russians, then they can expect to face an insurgency within their borders, and there will be some disaffected Russians willing to join in.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
It's why I always cycle in the centre of the lane in the middle of the city. I don't know if there are criminal proceedings against the woman - not sure if that is even possible.
That’s a truly awful case. Where I cycle I’m always wary of pedestrians and dog walkers. Off road provision is decent here. I’ve had more problems with pedestrians and being chased by uncontrolled dogs than I’ve ever had with cars.
I once hit an old lady in Brum. She just walked straight into the road and didn’t look. A car driver stopped. We checked her over. She was okay. Refused an ambulance but I was probably doing 12 MPH.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
I read about a case where a guy was delivering a Chinese takeaway on an e-bike and a hit a pedestrian who was crossing the road. The rider was done for wonton and furious driving.
Hi C. Noticed you namechecking Winchcombe recently. You a local, or were you just passing through?
Me? Winchcombe? Not me, must have been someone else who mentioned it.
But I have been there, aeons ago. Dim memory of visiting on a student days tour with the archaeological handbook and CAMRA guide, very necessary in those days of fizzy keg ale.
Somebody posted a pic from StPeter's Church, Winchcombe, which I can see from my back garden. Not you? Sorry, my mistake.
I know PB reaches far and wide but Winchcombe is a town of just 6,000 people so I would be surprised if we had two representatives here.
No worries. Friends used to live not far away and I got to know something of that area. Broadway, the Vale, the Malvern Hills ...
We're about 20 miles south of Broadway, which is dangerously close to ScottP, but he is safely beyond the Worcestershire border. I believe that passport control has his number and his visits to Gloucestershire are therefore confined to the National Hunt Festival.
And of course the Three Counties Showground!
Are you a member?
No, just been to a memorable show there long ago. Fine views of the hills, I seem to recall.
Say before the next election Starmer or some bolder replacement called a referendum to rejoin the EU and won. It will take some time to negotiate actually doing it with the EU.
What do Reform and the Tories run on in the next election? Ignore the referendum? Hold another one? Negotiate a better deal with the EU than Labour would?
After the experience post 2016, one thing any party promising a referendum would have to do would be to commit to negotiating the full details of any Rejoin package before a referendum were held. That would secure better terms for the UK, because then the EU negotiators would have to convince the UK public that they were offering a fair deal, and were not screwing the UK in the way they were allowed to get away with after the 2016 referendum.
i think we would simply find the EU refuse to discuss terms on those conditions. After 2016 they refused to discuss terms until after the invoking of Article 50, which had the effect of placing us on a timetable towards disaster without placing the EU under any pressure at all.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
I read about a case where a guy was delivering a Chinese takeaway on an e-bike and a hit a pedestrian who was crossing the road. The rider was done for wonton and furious driving.
I read they were also using donkeys, but I haven't seen a video of that yet.
There are some advantages to using horses. They don't need diesel (which helps, given the damage to oil refineries), they're better on rough terrain than a lot of vehicles, they're faster than going on foot and they can carry some of your gear.
I've no idea if the supply of suitable vehicles to Ukraine is keeping up with battlefield losses, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised to see Ukraine use horses too.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
Morning HYUFD,
I'm not so bullish over Labour in Scotland, they aren't polling as well as pre Hamilton, recent by elections in working class areas were poor for them. Right now they are losing voters to Reform and only slightly more competitive in white collar areas, and they are up against a party with only 1 MSP and effectively no Scottish leader.
Sarwar needs a very clear message and to take the fight on all flanks, to Reform, SNP and the wider electorate. It's easier said than done. He is going hard on the NHS, but needs to attack the SNPs record more. I don't share the view that Labour are heading for multiple gains over the SNP, they have both dropped, but Slabs vote has been squeezed more. Mr Starmer could find himself in big trouble once the votes are all counted up here. It all could change though
Once the true facts of Buggate emerge, the SNP are finished.
At the moment it's a nothingburger of a story, both complex and supposedly already resolved in Employment Tribunals.
Now the SNP probably shouldn't be given the right to run a whelk stall but that's on Scottish voters to decide.
Which parties should have oversight of a whelk stall? Please show your workings.
That's an overstatement, I'm afraid; Kenneth Robinson, Harold Wilson's first one, was widely held to be excellent.
In response to Mr eek's statement that: All Heath Secretaries fail - it's a complete impossible job that is all downsides with zero chance of an upside...
Hunt seemed to manage it.
Hunt followed Andrew Lansley who was widely. and as far as I know correctly, held to be a catastrophic health minister. It was impossible for Hunt not to be an "upside".
Hunt's book, Zero, is worth popping on your list to Father Christmas, for his reflections on running the NHS.
Say before the next election Starmer or some bolder replacement called a referendum to rejoin the EU and won. It will take some time to negotiate actually doing it with the EU.
What do Reform and the Tories run on in the next election? Ignore the referendum? Hold another one? Negotiate a better deal with the EU than Labour would?
After the experience post 2016, one thing any party promising a referendum would have to do would be to commit to negotiating the full details of any Rejoin package before a referendum were held. That would secure better terms for the UK, because then the EU negotiators would have to convince the UK public that they were offering a fair deal, and were not screwing the UK in the way they were allowed to get away with after the 2016 referendum.
i think we would simply find the EU refuse to discuss terms on those conditions. After 2016 they refused to discuss terms until after the invoking of Article 50, which had the effect of placing us on a timetable towards disaster without placing the EU under any pressure at all.
Besides, what is there to negotiate?
We're not perceived to be such a catch that the EU is going to change itself much to accommodate us.
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The problem with building lots of social housing is that the same costs for building will apply to the public sector.
Especially since they will be commissioning one of the Big House Builders to build estates of ugly boxes, with no amenities.
All the same farces of pointless paperwork, inadequate enforcement of standards etc etc.
The only difference would be the insistence on a “public housing spec” - which will be more expensive to build, uglier and poorer quality. I mean, that’s what they’ve *always* done.
So the government builds expensive houses. Which it then rents out cheaply. And has to find the money for the difference.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
Morning HYUFD,
I'm not so bullish over Labour in Scotland, they aren't polling as well as pre Hamilton, recent by elections in working class areas were poor for them. Right now they are losing voters to Reform and only slightly more competitive in white collar areas, and they are up against a party with only 1 MSP and effectively no Scottish leader.
Sarwar needs a very clear message and to take the fight on all flanks, to Reform, SNP and the wider electorate. It's easier said than done. He is going hard on the NHS, but needs to attack the SNPs record more. I don't share the view that Labour are heading for multiple gains over the SNP, they have both dropped, but Slabs vote has been squeezed more. Mr Starmer could find himself in big trouble once the votes are all counted up here. It all could change though
Morning DocG.
Since the 2021 Holyrood elections the SNP constituency vote is still down about 10 to 15% and the SLab vote only down about 5%. So you would still expect Labour to gain constituency MSPs from the SNP, more with unionist tactical voting. The SNP vote is actually down more than the Labour vote in Scotland since 2021.
Don’t forget the SNP have also been losing votes to Reform, especially white working class Scots who voted SNP in 2021 and maybe Labour in 2024. Sarwar does though need to attack the SNP hard I agree to get unionist tactical votes in Holyrood constituencies the SNP won in 2021 but where Labour were second
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
Are we really saying that a council could not create a dwelling for less than £440,000. That's an endightment of current building costs, planning laws, council efficiency, and half a dozen other things before it's an endightment of Right to buy.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
There's a tweet in reply that says it's a framework contract. There isn't literally an order for £11m worth of furniture to be delivered in one go, but there's been a tender for a supplier so that all orders for new furniture for the next period of time are under that contract, up to a limit of £11m.
This way the central bureaucracy controls the contract for furniture, but the local offices are able to order what they need as and when they need it.
Obviously, if you were able to dig into the detail it's possible that it's terrible value, but the actual sessions of the contract doesn't show that at all.
I read they were also using donkeys, but I haven't seen a video of that yet.
There are some advantages to using horses. They don't need diesel (which helps, given the damage to oil refineries), they're better on rough terrain than a lot of vehicles, they're faster than going on foot and they can carry some of your gear.
I've no idea if the supply of suitable vehicles to Ukraine is keeping up with battlefield losses, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised to see Ukraine use horses too.
There were definitely donkeys around earlier this year. I’ve even seen a photo of a camel that the Russians found from somewhere, presumably not too happy.
The issue with animals, is that they have a life expectancy measured in hours.
Ukraine has tanks and APCs, they don’t need animals.
The problem is that the BYD is half the price of the Mercedes or BMW, and not a lot different in performance or specification.
The battery side, range and charge time, is actually going to be better on the Chinese than the German vehicles.
But who wants to be seen in Chinese TAT
The market for cheap tat in the UK is enormous. Look at what most people wear about town nowadays. My neighbour just chopped a gorgeous cherry down to park their BYD on what used to be a garden.
Country has certainly gone to the dogs, chavtastic nowadays.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It is a bit - but many people's instinct will be to nod along.
"They're raising our taxes yet have cash for ..." is a fertile formula. You can do loads with it. Eg that there "just a dad in Tower Hamlets who's sick of all the madness".
Variations can be rolled out too. Eg instead of 'raising our taxes' refer to some unpopular spending cut. So, "they don't have money for XYZ yet somehow they do have it for ..."
Because it has 60,000 staff and £160 a chair is good value?
Not just chairs but desks too. As the tweet makes clear.
It may well be about saving money.
If you have staff sitting at a desk x hours a day, then you have an obligation to provide furniture that protects the staff against bad back, RSI etc.
Plenty of companies have been sued and had to make large settlements for this.
One reason for the popularity of the Herman Miller Aeron chairs in offices, was that they provided a bulletproof protection against such claims - “We spent over a thousand per person on buying the most ergonomic chairs on the planet”. I was told, by an HR person, that buying them meant that the company insurance policy against such things was a fraction of what it otherwise would be.
So you get expensive chairs, monitor arms (easy adjustment) and the latest - the powered, adjustable height desks.
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
Are we really saying that a council could not create a dwelling for less than £440,000. That's an endightment of current building costs, planning laws, council efficiency, and half a dozen other things before it's an endightment of Right to buy.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
The details of the contract are going to matter here. Is this 11 million for a one off complete refurb of all offices? Or is it 11m to provide new desks and chairs and replace broken ones "on demand" over the next five years? Is it a one off up front payment, or in installments over years? This could be a great value for money deal, or it could be spaffing money up the wall on something that didn't even need replacing -- we can't tell merely from "it costs 11 million".
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
There’s a lot of new government hubs opening around the country and older offices being sold. Would make total sense to do a lot at once in that context, and who knows when the legacy estate was last done.
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
Are we really saying that a council could not create a dwelling for less than £440,000. That's an endightment of current building costs, planning laws, council efficiency, and half a dozen other things before it's an endightment of Right to buy.
Say before the next election Starmer or some bolder replacement called a referendum to rejoin the EU and won. It will take some time to negotiate actually doing it with the EU.
What do Reform and the Tories run on in the next election? Ignore the referendum? Hold another one? Negotiate a better deal with the EU than Labour would?
After the experience post 2016, one thing any party promising a referendum would have to do would be to commit to negotiating the full details of any Rejoin package before a referendum were held. That would secure better terms for the UK, because then the EU negotiators would have to convince the UK public that they were offering a fair deal, and were not screwing the UK in the way they were allowed to get away with after the 2016 referendum.
i think we would simply find the EU refuse to discuss terms on those conditions. After 2016 they refused to discuss terms until after the invoking of Article 50, which had the effect of placing us on a timetable towards disaster without placing the EU under any pressure at all.
The difference betweem the EU and almost any other trade partner, is that they don’t come to negotiations looking at areas of agreement and discussion. They come with their existing rigid Treaty-defined structures, and find it very difficult to discuss anything outside of those structures with any potential partner.
The BYDs are crazy cheap over here. Japanese people are double-prejudiced against both China and EVs but apparently their plan is just to keep discounting until somebody buys one and tells their friends that electric cars are not in fact total shite, that's just the Japanese ones.
I got the AWD version of the Seal and various extras that their highly effective ex-Nissan salespeople sold my wife on (I got back from the loo after agreeing to buy it and they were halfway to selling her a large mechanical digger) and it was only a little over 5 million yen which is like 24,000 GBP. Then a month later they announced a bunch of even bigger discounts.
With the subsidies and various discounts you can get a Dolphin for about 2 million yen which is under 10,000 GBP. I heard some people who have solar are buying new BYD Dolphins to use as storage batteries. The normal batteries sold by Nichicon etc are over 1 million yen for like 8 kWh, and a Dolphin gives you 45 kWh, lasts longer, and as an added bonus you can drive it around.
What a fascinating modern age with live in.
Talking about the modern age. Russia developing rocket borne shrapnel weapons to take out Starlink.
Surely that risks not only Starlink, but all the other satellites in low Earth orbit. It could also potentially mean the end of human ambitions in space (including Musk's Mars plans).
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
There's a tweet in reply that says it's a framework contract. There isn't literally an order for £11m worth of furniture to be delivered in one go, but there's been a tender for a supplier so that all orders for new furniture for the next period of time are under that contract, up to a limit of £11m.
This way the central bureaucracy controls the contract for furniture, but the local offices are able to order what they need as and when they need it.
Obviously, if you were able to dig into the detail it's possible that it's terrible value, but the actual sessions of the contract doesn't show that at all.
Didn't Zia Yusuf get in a tizzy about a similar contract with Kent County Council involvement?
The path from "here's a number I neither like nor understand" to national outrage is way too short and smooth these days. The best answer is probably to mock and shame perpetrators, but a lot of him are pretty shameless.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
It's why I always cycle in the centre of the lane in the middle of the city. I don't know if there are criminal proceedings against the woman - not sure if that is even possible.
The accident was apparently on Queen's Drive, which is the road around Holyrood Park and Arthur's Seat. Depending on the day and time most of it is traffic free, ie cyclists only. Other times cars are allowed. There is an off road cycle track for part of the route, some of it shared with pedestrians. None of this is very clear.
Cyclists can go very fast on this road because of steep descents.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
She should but the law works on extra caution the more dangerous the vehicle. So lorry drivers have to pay extra attention to drivers, drivers to cyclists and motorcycles and pedestrians and cyclists to pedestrians etc. Even if the pedestrian or cyclist or motorcyclist was slightly at fault the driver will normally get the blame or the cyclist if a pedestrian unless say a motorcycle was being driven massively over the speed limit
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
There's a tweet in reply that says it's a framework contract. There isn't literally an order for £11m worth of furniture to be delivered in one go, but there's been a tender for a supplier so that all orders for new furniture for the next period of time are under that contract, up to a limit of £11m.
This way the central bureaucracy controls the contract for furniture, but the local offices are able to order what they need as and when they need it.
Obviously, if you were able to dig into the detail it's possible that it's terrible value, but the actual sessions of the contract doesn't show that at all.
The incentive would appear to be for the contractor to go up to the upper limit. There is no competitive tender process (except at the very beginning) so no need to offer value, or quality. Indeed, the more the furniture needs to be replaced, the more the chosen supplier earns. Nor does there appear to be any incentive for HMRC civil servants to make their furniture go a bit further or seek the best value option.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
I wonder if there is some major merging of offices on new sites going on, after the merger.
Office furniture covers more than that. Stationery cupboards, filing cabinets, meeting room kit, coffee area, etc. etc. A better grade of security for the locks for HMRC. And delivery and assembly.
Half the time the right complain about the shite facilities* in the public sector, half the time they complain when the facilities are upgraded to basic commercial standard, ie all looking reasonably neat and professional and to modern H&S standards esp for screen work.
Why do posters who rely on right wing news never spend 20 seconds checking their facts before getting angry?
A quick google of "did hmrc spend 11m furniture?" leads to:
No, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) did not spend £11 million on furniture. Recent news reports indicate that HMRC spent over £1 million on office chairs and other furniture over a three-year period. Specifically, figures obtained via a Freedom of Information request in 2024 revealed the following spending: Over £1 million on office chairs £59,000 on desks £16,000 on storage units The spending, which included an £852,000 deal with the seat firm Posturite starting in October 2023, has drawn criticism from groups like the TaxPayers' Alliance, particularly as the purchases were made despite staff only being required to be in the office for a portion of the week. Other reports referencing £11 million relate to different government initiatives, such as funding for town and city centre recovery schemes or homelessness prevention programmes, not HMRC furniture.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
There's a tweet in reply that says it's a framework contract. There isn't literally an order for £11m worth of furniture to be delivered in one go, but there's been a tender for a supplier so that all orders for new furniture for the next period of time are under that contract, up to a limit of £11m.
This way the central bureaucracy controls the contract for furniture, but the local offices are able to order what they need as and when they need it.
Obviously, if you were able to dig into the detail it's possible that it's terrible value, but the actual sessions of the contract doesn't show that at all.
Didn't Zia Yusuf get in a tizzy about a similar contract with Kent County Council involvement?
The path from "here's a number I neither like nor understand" to national outrage is way to short and smith these days. The best answer is probably to mock and shame perpetrators, but a lot of him are pretty shameless.
It's also a bit risky because I've no idea whether this contract is a good deal for the taxpayer or not, so mocking Sandpit for criticising something he knows nothing about could easily rebound on me if it's shown to be an example of poor government procurement.
But, still, employer of tens of thousands of people might spend millions on office furniture is not a scandal without more detail.
OT - Yes indeed! Well I was very rude about Streeting but those quotes suggests he has a plan for the country. I'll not comment on whether its a good plan or a plan likely to work. However, having a plan at least puts him ahead of the current No 10 operation.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
I agree. Everyone does stupid things some time or other and most accidents are avoided by the one doing the stupid thing interacting with someone who isn't (say driving defensively) who avoid the accident. On the rare occasions that 2 people do stupid things in the same vicinity you get accidents. She should not have been crossing the road reading her phone. He should not have been riding a fixed wheel bike without front brakes (a fixed wheeled bike does not need rear brakes, but front brakes are essential).
I always get frustrated with people who don't drive defensively, typical examples being those who come in from a motorway slip road straight to the overtaking lane. They may know what they are doing, but the rest of us make mistakes and might interact with these pillocks.
The BYDs are crazy cheap over here. Japanese people are double-prejudiced against both China and EVs but apparently their plan is just to keep discounting until somebody buys one and tells their friends that electric cars are not in fact total shite, that's just the Japanese ones.
I got the AWD version of the Seal and various extras that their highly effective ex-Nissan salespeople sold my wife on (I got back from the loo after agreeing to buy it and they were halfway to selling her a large mechanical digger) and it was only a little over 5 million yen which is like 24,000 GBP. Then a month later they announced a bunch of even bigger discounts.
With the subsidies and various discounts you can get a Dolphin for about 2 million yen which is under 10,000 GBP. I heard some people who have solar are buying new BYD Dolphins to use as storage batteries. The normal batteries sold by Nichicon etc are over 1 million yen for like 8 kWh, and a Dolphin gives you 45 kWh, lasts longer, and as an added bonus you can drive it around.
What a fascinating modern age with live in.
Talking about the modern age. Russia developing rocket borne shrapnel weapons to take out Starlink.
Surely that risks not only Starlink, but all the other satellites in low Earth orbit. It could also potentially mean the end of human ambitions in space (including Musk's Mars plans).
Yes, it would be the space equivalent of a nuclear weapon.
Will their rockets work though, be big change.
Sigh.
Kessler Syndrome probably doesn’t work. It *provably* doesn’t work in very low Earth orbit.
The atmospheric drag at that altitude pulls anything not under active control out of orbit very fast. This is one of the reasons that SpaceX is asking the regulators (the FCC, usually) for permission to use lower and lower orbits.
The “barrel of ball bearings” ASAT idea has been around since before Gagarin. The problem with it is that a single barrel of ball bearings only covers a tiny volume, on one orbit. Which is why ASAT designers immediately move to more directed systems. Bit like the “engines on wingtips” thing that shows up in initial designs for supersonic aircraft in the 1950s.
Russia has a recent history of childish “super weapons” willy waving. Such as the Poseidon mega torpedo, the farcical nuclear powered cruise missile (managed to kill some Russian scientists) and their “hypersonic weapons” - short range ballistic missile strapped to an aircraft.
Note also that SpaceX is launching 86% of the world tonnage to orbit. Russia is launching less than 3%
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
She should but the law works on extra caution the more dangerous the vehicle. So lorry drivers have to pay extra attention to drivers, drivers to cyclists and motorcycles and pedestrians and cyclists to pedestrians etc. Even if the pedestrian or cyclist or motorcyclist was slightly at fault the driver will normally get the blame or the cyclist if a pedestrian unless say a motorcycle was being driven massively over the speed limit
You can usually tell when someone will walk out in front of you - they will be walking towards the kerb while looking at their phone. At this point you can ring your bell or shout - but they often also have headphones on. You can brake or take evasive action - having first checked that this will not put you under the wheels of a bus. Sometimes they just step out in front of you with no warning, though.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
Morning HYUFD,
I'm not so bullish over Labour in Scotland, they aren't polling as well as pre Hamilton, recent by elections in working class areas were poor for them. Right now they are losing voters to Reform and only slightly more competitive in white collar areas, and they are up against a party with only 1 MSP and effectively no Scottish leader.
Sarwar needs a very clear message and to take the fight on all flanks, to Reform, SNP and the wider electorate. It's easier said than done. He is going hard on the NHS, but needs to attack the SNPs record more. I don't share the view that Labour are heading for multiple gains over the SNP, they have both dropped, but Slabs vote has been squeezed more. Mr Starmer could find himself in big trouble once the votes are all counted up here. It all could change though
Morning DocG.
Since the 2021 Holyrood elections the SNP constituency vote is still down about 10 to 15% and the SLab vote only down about 5%. So you would still expect Labour to gain constituency MSPs from the SNP, more with unionist tactical voting. The SNP vote is actually down more than the Labour vote in Scotland since 2021.
Don’t forget the SNP have also been losing votes to Reform, especially white working class Scots who voted SNP in 2021 and maybe Labour in 2024. Sarwar does though need to attack the SNP hard I agree to get unionist tactical votes in Holyrood constituencies the SNP won in 2021 but where Labour were second
I foresee both the SNP, Labour and the Conservatives all losing seats to Reform. The seats that Labour would hope to gain from the SNP are seats that will have a strong Reform presence. While I don’t see Reform picking up many FPTP seats, they will win a lot of list seats. Things have changed a lot since Labour gained Hamilton. Starmer’s Labour are despised as much in Scotland as they are in England and Wales. Outwith Edinburgh and Glasgow, the Greens are not as popular as they are in England, because they have a poor record in government from when they were part of the Bute House agreement. The Lib Dems will pick up a few more seats. The SNP will remain the largest party. Reform will probably be second. Labour, the Greens, the Conservatives and the Lib Dems will be jostling for third place. I can’t see any way that anyone will be able to form a stable government. We live in interesting times.
Why do posters who rely on right wing news never spend 20 seconds checking their facts before getting angry?
A quick google of "did hmrc spend 11m furniture?" leads to:
No, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) did not spend £11 million on furniture. Recent news reports indicate that HMRC spent over £1 million on office chairs and other furniture over a three-year period. Specifically, figures obtained via a Freedom of Information request in 2024 revealed the following spending: Over £1 million on office chairs £59,000 on desks £16,000 on storage units The spending, which included an £852,000 deal with the seat firm Posturite starting in October 2023, has drawn criticism from groups like the TaxPayers' Alliance, particularly as the purchases were made despite staff only being required to be in the office for a portion of the week. Other reports referencing £11 million relate to different government initiatives, such as funding for town and city centre recovery schemes or homelessness prevention programmes, not HMRC furniture.
That is an AI summary which is regurgitating details of a 2024 right wing gripe about HMRC furniture spending. It is approximately useless for telling us anything about this recent contract. (In general, I recommend not trusting google aearch AI summaries; look at actual search results and references.)
Why do posters who rely on right wing news never spend 20 seconds checking their facts before getting angry?
A quick google of "did hmrc spend 11m furniture?" leads to:
No, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) did not spend £11 million on furniture. Recent news reports indicate that HMRC spent over £1 million on office chairs and other furniture over a three-year period. Specifically, figures obtained via a Freedom of Information request in 2024 revealed the following spending: Over £1 million on office chairs £59,000 on desks £16,000 on storage units The spending, which included an £852,000 deal with the seat firm Posturite starting in October 2023, has drawn criticism from groups like the TaxPayers' Alliance, particularly as the purchases were made despite staff only being required to be in the office for a portion of the week. Other reports referencing £11 million relate to different government initiatives, such as funding for town and city centre recovery schemes or homelessness prevention programmes, not HMRC furniture.
Link to contract. Published last week, value £10.9m to a single supplier.
Why do posters who rely on right wing news never spend 20 seconds checking their facts before getting angry?
A quick google of "did hmrc spend 11m furniture?" leads to:
No, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) did not spend £11 million on furniture. Recent news reports indicate that HMRC spent over £1 million on office chairs and other furniture over a three-year period. Specifically, figures obtained via a Freedom of Information request in 2024 revealed the following spending: Over £1 million on office chairs £59,000 on desks £16,000 on storage units The spending, which included an £852,000 deal with the seat firm Posturite starting in October 2023, has drawn criticism from groups like the TaxPayers' Alliance, particularly as the purchases were made despite staff only being required to be in the office for a portion of the week. Other reports referencing £11 million relate to different government initiatives, such as funding for town and city centre recovery schemes or homelessness prevention programmes, not HMRC furniture.
"the purchases were made despite staff only being required to be in the office for a portion of the week"
That requires fewer chairs, not no chairs.
Last time I was in the office, I'm pretty sure that we had chairs. So even in the private sector, we spend money on such extravagances,
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
Are we really saying that a council could not create a dwelling for less than £440,000. That's an endightment of current building costs, planning laws, council efficiency, and half a dozen other things before it's an endightment of Right to buy.
Yes, it is.
The crapulence of what is actually built for that money is another indictment.
In recent years, we have seen properties torn down as irredeemably defective which are a year or two old.
Why do posters who rely on right wing news never spend 20 seconds checking their facts before getting angry?
A quick google of "did hmrc spend 11m furniture?" leads to:
No, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) did not spend £11 million on furniture. Recent news reports indicate that HMRC spent over £1 million on office chairs and other furniture over a three-year period. Specifically, figures obtained via a Freedom of Information request in 2024 revealed the following spending: Over £1 million on office chairs £59,000 on desks £16,000 on storage units The spending, which included an £852,000 deal with the seat firm Posturite starting in October 2023, has drawn criticism from groups like the TaxPayers' Alliance, particularly as the purchases were made despite staff only being required to be in the office for a portion of the week. Other reports referencing £11 million relate to different government initiatives, such as funding for town and city centre recovery schemes or homelessness prevention programmes, not HMRC furniture.
Link to contract. Published last week, value £10.9m to a single supplier.
Single supplier is to be expected. Uniform styling in office furniture is the norm, especially with the use of open plan design. Also making sure that modular design stuff actually fits together with wiring ducts, etc. - think open plan cubicles. And key systems. And single point to go to for assembly and installation.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
I wonder if there is some major merging of offices on new sites going on, after the merger.
Office furniture covers more than that. Stationery cupboards, filing cabinets, meeting room kit, coffee area, etc. etc. A better grade of security for the locks for HMRC. And delivery and assembly.
Half the time the right complain about the shite facilities* in the public sector, half the time they complain when the facilities are upgraded to basic commercial standard, ie all looking reasonably neat and professional and to modern H&S standards esp for screen work.
And the rest of the time (from their home computers) they demand civil servants all work in the office 5 days a week.
Look at the cost of office fit-outs in large private sector businesses. Facilities management procurement is largely the same process regardless of the buying organisation. I suspect the HMRC approach is rather more cheapskate than many of those.
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
Are we really saying that a council could not create a dwelling for less than £440,000. That's an endightment of current building costs, planning laws, council efficiency, and half a dozen other things before it's an endightment of Right to buy.
Yes, it is.
The crapulence of what is actually built for that money is another indictment.
In recent years, we have seen properties torn down as irredeemably defective which are a year or two old.
In some cases *before completion*
Building standards were higher before all the Polish and Lithuanian builders went home.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
She should but the law works on extra caution the more dangerous the vehicle. So lorry drivers have to pay extra attention to drivers, drivers to cyclists and motorcycles and pedestrians and cyclists to pedestrians etc. Even if the pedestrian or cyclist or motorcyclist was slightly at fault the driver will normally get the blame or the cyclist if a pedestrian unless say a motorcycle was being driven massively over the speed limit
You can usually tell when someone will walk out in front of you - they will be walking towards the kerb while looking at their phone. At this point you can ring your bell or shout - but they often also have headphones on. You can brake or take evasive action - having first checked that this will not put you under the wheels of a bus. Sometimes they just step out in front of you with no warning, though.
They may do but you will still likely get the blame if that pedestrian is killed or injured and be prosecuted. A prosecutor would say you were still at least careless if not as a driver or cyclist being ready to brake or take evasive action at all times
Why do posters who rely on right wing news never spend 20 seconds checking their facts before getting angry?
A quick google of "did hmrc spend 11m furniture?" leads to:
No, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) did not spend £11 million on furniture. Recent news reports indicate that HMRC spent over £1 million on office chairs and other furniture over a three-year period. Specifically, figures obtained via a Freedom of Information request in 2024 revealed the following spending: Over £1 million on office chairs £59,000 on desks £16,000 on storage units The spending, which included an £852,000 deal with the seat firm Posturite starting in October 2023, has drawn criticism from groups like the TaxPayers' Alliance, particularly as the purchases were made despite staff only being required to be in the office for a portion of the week. Other reports referencing £11 million relate to different government initiatives, such as funding for town and city centre recovery schemes or homelessness prevention programmes, not HMRC furniture.
Link to contract. Published last week, value £10.9m to a single supplier.
Single supplier is to be expected. Uniform styling in office furniture is the norm, especially with the use of open plan design. Also making sure that modular design stuff actually fits together with wiring ducts, etc. - think open plan cubicles. And key systems. And single point to go to for assembly and installation.
So not an objection per se.
That contact will include the equipment for HMRC's new Newcastle Office which is 9000 workers.
And 9000 Aeron chairs at full retail (yes cheaper, crappier chairs are available and will be inflicted on HMRC's staff) would cost £12 million at retail prices.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
Lib Dems have won more local byelections than any other party this year.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
I wonder if there is some major merging of offices on new sites going on, after the merger.
Office furniture covers more than that. Stationery cupboards, filing cabinets, meeting room kit, coffee area, etc. etc. A better grade of security for the locks for HMRC. And delivery and assembly.
Half the time the right complain about the shite facilities* in the public sector, half the time they complain when the facilities are upgraded to basic commercial standard, ie all looking reasonably neat and professional and to modern H&S standards esp for screen work.
And the rest of the time (from their home computers) they demand civil servants all work in the office 5 days a week.
Look at the cost of office fit-outs in large private sector businesses. Facilities management procurement is largely the same process regardless of the buying organisation. I suspect the HMRC approach is rather more cheapskate than many of those.
£11 million doesn't seem expensive to me for 70,000 employees and £5 billion operating costs. I think people who haven't worked in large organisations don't have an understanding of how much money swills around.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
I wonder if there is some major merging of offices on new sites going on, after the merger.
Office furniture covers more than that. Stationery cupboards, filing cabinets, meeting room kit, coffee area, etc. etc. A better grade of security for the locks for HMRC. And delivery and assembly.
Half the time the right complain about the shite facilities* in the public sector, half the time they complain when the facilities are upgraded to basic commercial standard, ie all looking reasonably neat and professional and to modern H&S standards esp for screen work.
And the rest of the time (from their home computers) they demand civil servants all work in the office 5 days a week.
Look at the cost of office fit-outs in large private sector businesses. Facilities management procurement is largely the same process regardless of the buying organisation. I suspect the HMRC approach is rather more cheapskate than many of those.
£11 million doesn't seem expensive to me for 70,000 employees and £5 billion operating costs. I think people who haven't worked in large organisations don't have an understanding of how much money swills around.
It seems a lot until you break it down.
2 years so £5.5m a year 70000 employees so about £80 per worker per year.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
There's a tweet in reply that says it's a framework contract. There isn't literally an order for £11m worth of furniture to be delivered in one go, but there's been a tender for a supplier so that all orders for new furniture for the next period of time are under that contract, up to a limit of £11m.
This way the central bureaucracy controls the contract for furniture, but the local offices are able to order what they need as and when they need it.
Obviously, if you were able to dig into the detail it's possible that it's terrible value, but the actual sessions of the contract doesn't show that at all.
The incentive would appear to be for the contractor to go up to the upper limit. There is no competitive tender process (except at the very beginning) so no need to offer value, or quality. Indeed, the more the furniture needs to be replaced, the more the chosen supplier earns. Nor does there appear to be any incentive for HMRC civil servants to make their furniture go a bit further or seek the best value option.
Nah, if you had worked to a framework deal like this you’d know there’s all sorts of benchmarking in there. They are terrible ideas for more complex procurement, but for consumables they work well. They won’t deliver the cheapest unit price but they do deliver something manageable for a large organisation, that avoids having to have purchasing and contract managers everywhere.
To be honest, the main problem with a standard government contract is when the government side leaves in onerous provisions and is not flexible enough. E.g. Unlimited liability that the supplier has to price for based on securing insurance, even if it gets no guaranteed work, when a sensible cap might have been negotiated because the risk is low.
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
I wonder if there is some major merging of offices on new sites going on, after the merger.
Office furniture covers more than that. Stationery cupboards, filing cabinets, meeting room kit, coffee area, etc. etc. A better grade of security for the locks for HMRC. And delivery and assembly.
Half the time the right complain about the shite facilities* in the public sector, half the time they complain when the facilities are upgraded to basic commercial standard, ie all looking reasonably neat and professional and to modern H&S standards esp for screen work.
And the rest of the time (from their home computers) they demand civil servants all work in the office 5 days a week.
Look at the cost of office fit-outs in large private sector businesses. Facilities management procurement is largely the same process regardless of the buying organisation. I suspect the HMRC approach is rather more cheapskate than many of those.
£11 million doesn't seem expensive to me for 70,000 employees and £5 billion operating costs. I think people who haven't worked in large organisations don't have an understanding of how much money swills around.
That or PB’s “how hard can it be” contingent have discovered another string to their already impressive multi-talented bow: facilities procurement expertise.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
Morning HYUFD,
I'm not so bullish over Labour in Scotland, they aren't polling as well as pre Hamilton, recent by elections in working class areas were poor for them. Right now they are losing voters to Reform and only slightly more competitive in white collar areas, and they are up against a party with only 1 MSP and effectively no Scottish leader.
Sarwar needs a very clear message and to take the fight on all flanks, to Reform, SNP and the wider electorate. It's easier said than done. He is going hard on the NHS, but needs to attack the SNPs record more. I don't share the view that Labour are heading for multiple gains over the SNP, they have both dropped, but Slabs vote has been squeezed more. Mr Starmer could find himself in big trouble once the votes are all counted up here. It all could change though
Morning DocG.
Since the 2021 Holyrood elections the SNP constituency vote is still down about 10 to 15% and the SLab vote only down about 5%. So you would still expect Labour to gain constituency MSPs from the SNP, more with unionist tactical voting. The SNP vote is actually down more than the Labour vote in Scotland since 2021.
Don’t forget the SNP have also been losing votes to Reform, especially white working class Scots who voted SNP in 2021 and maybe Labour in 2024. Sarwar does though need to attack the SNP hard I agree to get unionist tactical votes in Holyrood constituencies the SNP won in 2021 but where Labour were second
I foresee both the SNP, Labour and the Conservatives all losing seats to Reform. The seats that Labour would hope to gain from the SNP are seats that will have a strong Reform presence. While I don’t see Reform picking up many FPTP seats, they will win a lot of list seats. Things have changed a lot since Labour gained Hamilton. Starmer’s Labour are despised as much in Scotland as they are in England and Wales. Outwith Edinburgh and Glasgow, the Greens are not as popular as they are in England, because they have a poor record in government from when they were part of the Bute House agreement. The Lib Dems will pick up a few more seats. The SNP will remain the largest party. Reform will probably be second. Labour, the Greens, the Conservatives and the Lib Dems will be jostling for third place. I can’t see any way that anyone will be able to form a stable government. We live in interesting times.
In Scotland, as Reform are still not polling first like in England or even at least a clear second or sometimes narrow first as in Wales, Reform may help Labour gain constituency seats in Holyrood. That is provided more 2021 SNP voters vote Reform than 2021 Labour voters vote Reform on the constituency vote in Holyrood seats Labour were second to the SNP in 2021
Because it has 60,000 staff and £160 a chair is good value?
Not just chairs but desks too. As the tweet makes clear.
It may well be about saving money.
If you have staff sitting at a desk x hours a day, then you have an obligation to provide furniture that protects the staff against bad back, RSI etc.
Plenty of companies have been sued and had to make large settlements for this.
One reason for the popularity of the Herman Miller Aeron chairs in offices, was that they provided a bulletproof protection against such claims - “We spent over a thousand per person on buying the most ergonomic chairs on the planet”. I was told, by an HR person, that buying them meant that the company insurance policy against such things was a fraction of what it otherwise would be.
So you get expensive chairs, monitor arms (easy adjustment) and the latest - the powered, adjustable height desks.
Yes, a typical office worker (public or private sector) spends a large portion of their life in their chair. Having a comfortable one is important and a good use of £££. It's no different to making sure our soldiers have proper boots.
It's a fucking disgrace. HMRC staff, indeed all civil servants, don't need office furniture or equipment. They should stand upright with clipboard and pen in hand, get on with their job, and stop whingeing.
I'm only interested (parochially) in the London local elections next year (actually, not just parochially, I can't really comment on much else except for the elections to the two new Shadow Unitaries in Surrey).
In my patch, it's looking increasingly like Labour vs Newham Independents (NIP) with the Greens a strong third. The questions are a) whether Mehmood Mirza can win the mayoralty off Labour and b) whether the NIP can take enough seats to deprive Labour of a majority and whether there's a post-election deal to be done with the Greens.
NIP can easily 15 and possibly 23 seats but they really need 25-30 (with the Greens winning 9-12) and that's a harder one to forecast. Reform will be interesting (18% in Plaistow suggests a constituency but is there enough to win anywhere, even Beckton?) but more as a spoiler for Labour.
It's a fucking disgrace. HMRC staff, indeed all civil servants, don't need office furniture or equipment. They should stand upright with clipboard and pen in hand, get on with their job, and stop whingeing.
Clipboards?! Floors?! Pens?! Woke nonsense.
Slate. Vellum. Their own blood using quills. That’s what they should have.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
She should but the law works on extra caution the more dangerous the vehicle. So lorry drivers have to pay extra attention to drivers, drivers to cyclists and motorcycles and pedestrians and cyclists to pedestrians etc. Even if the pedestrian or cyclist or motorcyclist was slightly at fault the driver will normally get the blame or the cyclist if a pedestrian unless say a motorcycle was being driven massively over the speed limit
You can usually tell when someone will walk out in front of you - they will be walking towards the kerb while looking at their phone. At this point you can ring your bell or shout - but they often also have headphones on. You can brake or take evasive action - having first checked that this will not put you under the wheels of a bus. Sometimes they just step out in front of you with no warning, though.
They may do but you will still likely get the blame if that pedestrian is killed or injured and be prosecuted. A prosecutor would say you were still at least careless if not as a driver or cyclist being ready to brake or take evasive action at all times
I doubt any driver or cyclist would be prosecuted for hitting a pedestrian who walks out directly in front of them. There is a reaction time and a braking distance that you need to factor in. Cyclists in particular are always riding defensively, because if we hit a pedestrian we may well be injured as much as they are (from a weight point of view the bike itself is typically marginal: a cyclist colliding with a pedestrian is just two people hitting each other).
Er, HMRC have loads of offices and will sometimes need new furniture. You're not expecting people to work on the floor are you?
What a weird thing to complain about.
It’s not that some of them need new furniture, it’s that they’re spending £11m on one order for furniture. Surely they’re not buying a desk and chair for their whole staff all at the same time?
I wonder if there is some major merging of offices on new sites going on, after the merger.
Office furniture covers more than that. Stationery cupboards, filing cabinets, meeting room kit, coffee area, etc. etc. A better grade of security for the locks for HMRC. And delivery and assembly.
Half the time the right complain about the shite facilities* in the public sector, half the time they complain when the facilities are upgraded to basic commercial standard, ie all looking reasonably neat and professional and to modern H&S standards esp for screen work.
And the rest of the time (from their home computers) they demand civil servants all work in the office 5 days a week.
Look at the cost of office fit-outs in large private sector businesses. Facilities management procurement is largely the same process regardless of the buying organisation. I suspect the HMRC approach is rather more cheapskate than many of those.
£11 million doesn't seem expensive to me for 70,000 employees and £5 billion operating costs. I think people who haven't worked in large organisations don't have an understanding of how much money swills around.
That or PB’s “how hard can it be” contingent have discovered another string to their already impressive multi-talented bow: facilities procurement expertise.
No need to be snide.
Bear in mind, also, the new HMRC building in Newcastle which will accommodate 6,000 people. Also replacing old stock.
I sourced new furniture when we refurbished our offices. A business with 100 staff. It wasn’t cheap and it needed to meet ergonomic requirements. I can easily see this spend being reasonable. It didn’t just include chairs for people but tables, equipment for pods and meeting rooms too.
I don’t think this unreasonable. Do people expect them to stand all day.
Why do posters who rely on right wing news never spend 20 seconds checking their facts before getting angry?
A quick google of "did hmrc spend 11m furniture?" leads to:
No, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) did not spend £11 million on furniture. Recent news reports indicate that HMRC spent over £1 million on office chairs and other furniture over a three-year period. Specifically, figures obtained via a Freedom of Information request in 2024 revealed the following spending: Over £1 million on office chairs £59,000 on desks £16,000 on storage units The spending, which included an £852,000 deal with the seat firm Posturite starting in October 2023, has drawn criticism from groups like the TaxPayers' Alliance, particularly as the purchases were made despite staff only being required to be in the office for a portion of the week. Other reports referencing £11 million relate to different government initiatives, such as funding for town and city centre recovery schemes or homelessness prevention programmes, not HMRC furniture.
Link to contract. Published last week, value £10.9m to a single supplier.
Single supplier is to be expected. Uniform styling in office furniture is the norm, especially with the use of open plan design. Also making sure that modular design stuff actually fits together with wiring ducts, etc. - think open plan cubicles. And key systems. And single point to go to for assembly and installation.
So not an objection per se.
That contact will include the equipment for HMRC's new Newcastle Office which is 9000 workers.
And 9000 Aeron chairs at full retail (yes cheaper, crappier chairs are available and will be inflicted on HMRC's staff) would cost £12 million at retail prices.
I guess one new large office could take a fair bit of the budget, although one might argue why exactly HMRC needs so many people, nearly 70k in total, given that most of us now do everything tax-related ourselves online.
Because it has 60,000 staff and £160 a chair is good value?
Not just chairs but desks too. As the tweet makes clear.
It may well be about saving money.
If you have staff sitting at a desk x hours a day, then you have an obligation to provide furniture that protects the staff against bad back, RSI etc.
Plenty of companies have been sued and had to make large settlements for this.
One reason for the popularity of the Herman Miller Aeron chairs in offices, was that they provided a bulletproof protection against such claims - “We spent over a thousand per person on buying the most ergonomic chairs on the planet”. I was told, by an HR person, that buying them meant that the company insurance policy against such things was a fraction of what it otherwise would be.
So you get expensive chairs, monitor arms (easy adjustment) and the latest - the powered, adjustable height desks.
Yes, a typical office worker (public or private sector) spends a large portion of their life in their chair. Having a comfortable one is important and a good use of £££. It's no different to making sure our soldiers have proper boots.
Not only that if you don’t give one that is fit for purpose you could end up on the wrong side of a legal claim for a ‘bad back’
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
Morning HYUFD,
I'm not so bullish over Labour in Scotland, they aren't polling as well as pre Hamilton, recent by elections in working class areas were poor for them. Right now they are losing voters to Reform and only slightly more competitive in white collar areas, and they are up against a party with only 1 MSP and effectively no Scottish leader.
Sarwar needs a very clear message and to take the fight on all flanks, to Reform, SNP and the wider electorate. It's easier said than done. He is going hard on the NHS, but needs to attack the SNPs record more. I don't share the view that Labour are heading for multiple gains over the SNP, they have both dropped, but Slabs vote has been squeezed more. Mr Starmer could find himself in big trouble once the votes are all counted up here. It all could change though
Morning DocG.
Since the 2021 Holyrood elections the SNP constituency vote is still down about 10 to 15% and the SLab vote only down about 5%. So you would still expect Labour to gain constituency MSPs from the SNP, more with unionist tactical voting. The SNP vote is actually down more than the Labour vote in Scotland since 2021.
Don’t forget the SNP have also been losing votes to Reform, especially white working class Scots who voted SNP in 2021 and maybe Labour in 2024. Sarwar does though need to attack the SNP hard I agree to get unionist tactical votes in Holyrood constituencies the SNP won in 2021 but where Labour were second
I foresee both the SNP, Labour and the Conservatives all losing seats to Reform. The seats that Labour would hope to gain from the SNP are seats that will have a strong Reform presence. While I don’t see Reform picking up many FPTP seats, they will win a lot of list seats. Things have changed a lot since Labour gained Hamilton. Starmer’s Labour are despised as much in Scotland as they are in England and Wales. Outwith Edinburgh and Glasgow, the Greens are not as popular as they are in England, because they have a poor record in government from when they were part of the Bute House agreement. The Lib Dems will pick up a few more seats. The SNP will remain the largest party. Reform will probably be second. Labour, the Greens, the Conservatives and the Lib Dems will be jostling for third place. I can’t see any way that anyone will be able to form a stable government. We live in interesting times.
In Scotland, as Reform are still not polling first like in England or even at least a clear second or sometimes narrow first as in Wales, Reform may help Labour gain constituency seats in Holyrood. That is provided more 2021 SNP voters vote Reform than 2021 Labour voters vote Reform on the constituency vote in Holyrood seats Labour were second to the SNP in 2021
Remember that Scotland has a form of proportional representation. If Reform were second in every seat in Scotland, they would not pick up any constituency seats, but would gain the majority of the regional seats.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
She should but the law works on extra caution the more dangerous the vehicle. So lorry drivers have to pay extra attention to drivers, drivers to cyclists and motorcycles and pedestrians and cyclists to pedestrians etc. Even if the pedestrian or cyclist or motorcyclist was slightly at fault the driver will normally get the blame or the cyclist if a pedestrian unless say a motorcycle was being driven massively over the speed limit
You can usually tell when someone will walk out in front of you - they will be walking towards the kerb while looking at their phone. At this point you can ring your bell or shout - but they often also have headphones on. You can brake or take evasive action - having first checked that this will not put you under the wheels of a bus. Sometimes they just step out in front of you with no warning, though.
They may do but you will still likely get the blame if that pedestrian is killed or injured and be prosecuted. A prosecutor would say you were still at least careless if not as a driver or cyclist being ready to brake or take evasive action at all times
I doubt any driver or cyclist would be prosecuted for hitting a pedestrian who walks out directly in front of them. There is a reaction time and a braking distance that you need to factor in. Cyclists in particular are always riding defensively, because if we hit a pedestrian we may well be injured as much as they are (from a weight point of view the bike itself is typically marginal: a cyclist colliding with a pedestrian is just two people hitting each other).
They likely would. Certainly provided it could be shown they could have had enough breaking distance to stop
It's so left field I wonder what the long term agenda is for reform - actively building social housing?
The article is about Right to buy - which is different to Help to buy.
Yep I'm an idiot - but the fact that the Telegraph is saying right to buy (THE Thatcherite policy) was a bad idea with serious consequences is incredibly interesting.
Are we really saying that a council could not create a dwelling for less than £440,000. That's an endightment of current building costs, planning laws, council efficiency, and half a dozen other things before it's an endightment of Right to buy.
Yes, it is.
The crapulence of what is actually built for that money is another indictment.
In recent years, we have seen properties torn down as irredeemably defective which are a year or two old.
In some cases *before completion*
Building standards were higher before all the Polish and Lithuanian builders went home.
Nope. Barrat having been building shit for years.
With Polish labour. And all the other Eastern Europeans.
It’s a simple thing, that the Victorians understood. Hell, the Medievals had a clue on the subject.
If you have a standard, you get two things. A potentially better product for the consumer. You also create an opportunity for the unscrupulous.
A simple example is the minimum wage. As it goes up, this increases the incentives to pay people less.
During the early 2000s my relative who runs a building company tried to get something done about the following - in whole swathes of London, it was not possible to compete with illegal builders (cash in hand, illegal employment, gross violations of H & S, gross violations of building standards).
Nothing was done - because, as he was told, it was policy to ignore it.
The answer is not to abolish standards. But as those Victorians (and Medievals , with the Guilds) understood, a regulation or a standard is worse than useless without… drum roll… *enforcement*
What you need is simple, clear standards. And teeth in enforcement.
Instead we have had a nearly exponential increase in paperwork. And reductions in enforcement.
Imagine a big site. The Big Builders have actually subcontracted the site to A, who have subcontracted down the alphabet to about Q. Who digs the ditches for the foundation six inches less than plan - quicker, cheaper (less concrete and rebar). This is (largely) because Q is being squeezed on price.
The Big Builders know. But they don’t know in the legal, provable sense.
The inspectors look at the foundations for one house. That’s done properly. The others have been filled with concrete before they got there. So sorry. Just sign here.
When it gets found out, Q has gone out of business (different Ltd for each job).
It's a fucking disgrace. HMRC staff, indeed all civil servants, don't need office furniture or equipment. They should stand upright with clipboard and pen in hand, get on with their job, and stop whingeing.
Why not just get rid of HMRC completely? If we didn't have to employ tax collectors we probably wouldn't need to pay taxes anyway. Especially if we throw out all the immigrants who are costing us billions! Or maybe all the woke lefties could pay for the government out of their own pocket if they like it so much. Etc etc.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
She should but the law works on extra caution the more dangerous the vehicle. So lorry drivers have to pay extra attention to drivers, drivers to cyclists and motorcycles and pedestrians and cyclists to pedestrians etc. Even if the pedestrian or cyclist or motorcyclist was slightly at fault the driver will normally get the blame or the cyclist if a pedestrian unless say a motorcycle was being driven massively over the speed limit
You can usually tell when someone will walk out in front of you - they will be walking towards the kerb while looking at their phone. At this point you can ring your bell or shout - but they often also have headphones on. You can brake or take evasive action - having first checked that this will not put you under the wheels of a bus. Sometimes they just step out in front of you with no warning, though.
They may do but you will still likely get the blame if that pedestrian is killed or injured and be prosecuted. A prosecutor would say you were still at least careless if not as a driver or cyclist being ready to brake or take evasive action at all times
I doubt any driver or cyclist would be prosecuted for hitting a pedestrian who walks out directly in front of them. There is a reaction time and a braking distance that you need to factor in. Cyclists in particular are always riding defensively, because if we hit a pedestrian we may well be injured as much as they are (from a weight point of view the bike itself is typically marginal: a cyclist colliding with a pedestrian is just two people hitting each other).
They likely would. Certainly provided it could be shown they could have had enough breaking distance to stop
In the case in question, what did for the cyclist was that he had bought the bike with a brake on it. Then removed it, making it illegal.
There's a lot of engineering him into position I think, and Starmer is clearly on board - not sure how else someone openly campaigning for the top job is still in the Cabinet. He is the annointed successor - and always was.
For that reason, I don't think he makes it.
Doubt he is anointed. There was number 10 briefing against him about a month ago.
IMO wouldn't be surprised if Starmer sacks him, says he needs to bring someone in to end the strikes.
I think it depends on how desperate Labour becomes, which itself depends on how catastrophic the local elections are. If Labour has a true mare - for example losing control of London Boroughs which they currently run with large majorities - then switching to Streeting might be on the cards. The one caveat is if the big winner in the cities happens to be the Greens, Labour members might conclude that being more radical and passionate and tacking left is what's required.
Labour won a NEV of 35% in 2022, and will probably win about 10-15% in May. Reform won nothing in 2022, and will probably win 25-30% next year. The Greens would surge, but the traditional outperformance in local elections by the Lib Dem’s will take a lot of votes that would otherwise go to them. The Conservatives will probably win 20-25%, compared to 30% in 2022.
What that likely means is Labour being hit on multiple fronts.
Boroughs like Barnsley, Wakefield, Sunderland, Halton, Sandwell, Thurrock will go Reform.
Islington, Hackney, Camden, Lambeth, Birmingham, Southwark, Brent, South Tyneside, will be lost to NOC at least (Your Party will also be challenging in some).
The Tories will lose a string of counties and new unitaries to Reform, but pick up Westminster, Barnet, Wandsworth,
And of course, the results in Wales and Scotland will be horrid.
I suspect Labour will actually get about 20%, win London overall still and do better than expected in Scotland where Holyrood polls suggest Labour gains from the SNP as in the Hamilton by election. That will stop a bad night for Starmer becoming a catastrophe and may save his job
Otherwise agree with Reform and the Greens likely the main winners next year plus Plaid in Wales and the LDs treading water as the Tories and Labour collapse
With both Tories and Labour down, I'd be surprised and disappointed if the LDs just tread water. National opinion polls during the 2022 local campaign period had Labour on around 40%, the Tories on around 34%, with the LDs at 10%. The political situation now is hugely better for the LDs in relation to both the major parties, notwithstanding Reform's huge surge from just 5% back then.
You may see some LD gains from the Tories, Labour and SNP but offset by some LD losses to the Greens and Reform and Plaid
Mark Pack is a good scout and he has been dutifully recording the LD's ups and downs since the GE. It's been generally a pattern of modest progress, and I would expect that to continue through the May contests.
One would think the ID card Bill, and rejoining the EU moving the agenda, are both in the LibDem’s favour?
Mark Pack is standing down as Lib Dem President from January 1st, so he will have more time on his hands (as if!).
I hope to engage him in suggesting ways in which members of the House of Lords can be held to account when they waste the time of the HoL repeatedly spouting inane bollocks into the national conversation, displaying the hinterland of a lobotomised slug.
(That follows a particular recent debate on aspects of 'cycling' where there were peers reading out bits of the Telegraph, and proposing amendments to introduce laws that have already been in law for nearly half a century already.)
Since when has death by dangerous cycling, death by careless cycling or serious injury by dangerous or careless cycling been UK law for cyclists unlike the equivalent death or serious injury offences by dangerous or careless driving for drivers of vehicles?
They used wanton and furious driving in this case
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
She should but the law works on extra caution the more dangerous the vehicle. So lorry drivers have to pay extra attention to drivers, drivers to cyclists and motorcycles and pedestrians and cyclists to pedestrians etc. Even if the pedestrian or cyclist or motorcyclist was slightly at fault the driver will normally get the blame or the cyclist if a pedestrian unless say a motorcycle was being driven massively over the speed limit
You can usually tell when someone will walk out in front of you - they will be walking towards the kerb while looking at their phone. At this point you can ring your bell or shout - but they often also have headphones on. You can brake or take evasive action - having first checked that this will not put you under the wheels of a bus. Sometimes they just step out in front of you with no warning, though.
They may do but you will still likely get the blame if that pedestrian is killed or injured and be prosecuted. A prosecutor would say you were still at least careless if not as a driver or cyclist being ready to brake or take evasive action at all times
I doubt any driver or cyclist would be prosecuted for hitting a pedestrian who walks out directly in front of them. There is a reaction time and a braking distance that you need to factor in. Cyclists in particular are always riding defensively, because if we hit a pedestrian we may well be injured as much as they are (from a weight point of view the bike itself is typically marginal: a cyclist colliding with a pedestrian is just two people hitting each other).
They likely would. Certainly provided it could be shown they could have had enough breaking distance to stop
If there is sufficient braking (sic) distance I would not put that in the category of walking out directly in front of you.
£11m to fit out an office strikes me as pretty good value. Especially if it gets them in office and working with higher productivity than they have WFH which is clearly not very high given all of the issues people are having with HMRC.
I've done a bit of ergonomics and office re-structuring in my time and £11 million is nothing. I've seen companies spend hundreds of millions on complete redesigns for a more "open" workplace with various zones - the Network Zone, the Quiet Zone, the Consumption Zone (where you have your lunch rather than at your desk).
Unfortunately, as soon as one of these half-stories appears on social media, we get the predictable howls of outrage from the usual suspects moaning about "waste".
It's now a factor in political debate that no one stops, thinks and checks - it's all about the instant emotive response which while revealing in its own way, doesn't help move the argument.
Comments
Australia 1637-44
England 1549-60
https://x.com/lnallalingham/status/2003029277759979530
https://www.ft.com/content/8c0eddd7-e88f-4c96-9c32-d50cb7bb5899 (£££)
I'm not so bullish over Labour in Scotland, they aren't polling as well as pre Hamilton, recent by elections in working class areas were poor for them. Right now they are losing voters to Reform and only slightly more competitive in white collar areas, and they are up against a party with only 1 MSP and effectively no Scottish leader.
Sarwar needs a very clear message and to take the fight on all flanks, to Reform, SNP and the wider electorate. It's easier said than done. He is going hard on the NHS, but needs to attack the SNPs record more. I don't share the view that Labour are heading for multiple gains over the SNP, they have both dropped, but Slabs vote has been squeezed more. Mr Starmer could find himself in big trouble once the votes are all counted up here. It all could change though
Where a dozy woman was looking at her phone and walked out on the road and the guy was using a not road legal bike.
I had a little sympathy for the cyclist. She should be paying attention when crossing the road.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41028321
What has to happen for them? Two things above all else: Labour to succeed on immigration and fail on the economy. They need immigration to fall in salience because if that's the election issue Reform will win. The Tories need the election issue to be the £££. Specifically they need the economy and public finances to deteriorate from here rather than improve. If this happens, doesn't matter why, and they can retrieve that USP (ie it proves strong enough to withstand the Trussterfuck), I give them a good chance of returning to power (as largest party anyway) next time.
It's why I always cycle in the centre of the lane in the middle of the city. I don't know if there are criminal proceedings against the woman - not sure if that is even possible.
Now the SNP probably shouldn't be given the right to run a whelk stall but that's on Scottish voters to decide.
I once hit an old lady in Brum. She just walked straight into the road and didn’t look. A car driver stopped. We checked her over. She was okay. Refused an ambulance but I was probably doing 12 MPH.
What a weird thing to complain about.
Cavalry, as in actual soldiers on horseback.
https://x.com/osinttechnical/status/2003063157212999859
There are some advantages to using horses. They don't need diesel (which helps, given the damage to oil refineries), they're better on rough terrain than a lot of vehicles, they're faster than going on foot and they can carry some of your gear.
I've no idea if the supply of suitable vehicles to Ukraine is keeping up with battlefield losses, but I wouldn't be entirely surprised to see Ukraine use horses too.
We're not perceived to be such a catch that the EU is going to change itself much to accommodate us.
Especially since they will be commissioning one of the Big House Builders to build estates of ugly boxes, with no amenities.
All the same farces of pointless paperwork, inadequate enforcement of standards etc etc.
The only difference would be the insistence on a “public housing spec” - which will be more expensive to build, uglier and poorer quality. I mean, that’s what they’ve *always* done.
So the government builds expensive houses. Which it then rents out cheaply. And has to find the money for the difference.
Since the 2021 Holyrood elections the SNP constituency vote is still down about 10 to 15% and the SLab vote only down about 5%. So you would still expect Labour to gain constituency MSPs from the SNP, more with unionist tactical voting. The SNP vote is actually down more than the Labour vote in Scotland since 2021.
Don’t forget the SNP have also been losing votes to Reform, especially white working class Scots who voted SNP in 2021 and maybe Labour in 2024. Sarwar does though need to attack the SNP hard I agree to get unionist tactical votes in Holyrood constituencies the SNP won in 2021 but where Labour were second
This way the central bureaucracy controls the contract for furniture, but the local offices are able to order what they need as and when they need it.
Obviously, if you were able to dig into the detail it's possible that it's terrible value, but the actual sessions of the contract doesn't show that at all.
The issue with animals, is that they have a life expectancy measured in hours.
Ukraine has tanks and APCs, they don’t need animals.
"They're raising our taxes yet have cash for ..." is a fertile formula. You can do loads with it. Eg that there "just a dad in Tower Hamlets who's sick of all the madness".
Variations can be rolled out too. Eg instead of 'raising our taxes' refer to some unpopular spending cut. So, "they don't have money for XYZ yet somehow they do have it for ..."
If you have staff sitting at a desk x hours a day, then you have an obligation to provide furniture that protects the staff against bad back, RSI etc.
Plenty of companies have been sued and had to make large settlements for this.
One reason for the popularity of the Herman Miller Aeron chairs in offices, was that they provided a bulletproof protection against such claims - “We spent over a thousand per person on buying the most ergonomic chairs on the planet”. I was told, by an HR person, that buying them meant that the company insurance policy against such things was a fraction of what it otherwise would be.
So you get expensive chairs, monitor arms (easy adjustment) and the latest - the powered, adjustable height desks.
(As it happens it looks like it's a two year contract: https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/Notice/c2ebc7d5-e787-4fd4-95ec-133629f52f74 )
The path from "here's a number I neither like nor understand" to national outrage is way too short and smooth these days. The best answer is probably to mock and shame perpetrators, but a lot of him are pretty shameless.
Cyclists can go very fast on this road because of steep descents.
Office furniture covers more than that. Stationery cupboards, filing cabinets, meeting room kit, coffee area, etc. etc. A better grade of security for the locks for HMRC. And delivery and assembly.
Half the time the right complain about the shite facilities* in the public sector, half the time they complain when the facilities are upgraded to basic commercial standard, ie all looking reasonably neat and professional and to modern H&S standards esp for screen work.
A quick google of "did hmrc spend 11m furniture?" leads to:
No, HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) did not spend £11 million on furniture. Recent news reports indicate that HMRC spent over £1 million on office chairs and other furniture over a three-year period.
Specifically, figures obtained via a Freedom of Information request in 2024 revealed the following spending:
Over £1 million on office chairs
£59,000 on desks
£16,000 on storage units
The spending, which included an £852,000 deal with the seat firm Posturite starting in October 2023, has drawn criticism from groups like the TaxPayers' Alliance, particularly as the purchases were made despite staff only being required to be in the office for a portion of the week.
Other reports referencing £11 million relate to different government initiatives, such as funding for town and city centre recovery schemes or homelessness prevention programmes, not HMRC furniture.
But, still, employer of tens of thousands of people might spend millions on office furniture is not a scandal without more detail.
I always get frustrated with people who don't drive defensively, typical examples being those who come in from a motorway slip road straight to the overtaking lane. They may know what they are doing, but the rest of us make mistakes and might interact with these pillocks.
Kessler Syndrome probably doesn’t work. It *provably* doesn’t work in very low Earth orbit.
The atmospheric drag at that altitude pulls anything not under active control out of orbit very fast. This is one of the reasons that SpaceX is asking the regulators (the FCC, usually) for permission to use lower and lower orbits.
The “barrel of ball bearings” ASAT idea has been around since before Gagarin. The problem with it is that a single barrel of ball bearings only covers a tiny volume, on one orbit. Which is why ASAT designers immediately move to more directed systems. Bit like the “engines on wingtips” thing that shows up in initial designs for supersonic aircraft in the 1950s.
Russia has a recent history of childish “super weapons” willy waving. Such as the Poseidon mega torpedo, the farcical nuclear powered cruise missile (managed to kill some Russian scientists) and their “hypersonic weapons” - short range ballistic missile strapped to an aircraft.
Note also that SpaceX is launching 86% of the world tonnage to orbit. Russia is launching less than 3%
We live in interesting times.
https://www.contractsfinder.service.gov.uk/Notice/c2ebc7d5-e787-4fd4-95ec-133629f52f74
That requires fewer chairs, not no chairs.
Last time I was in the office, I'm pretty sure that we had chairs. So even in the private sector, we spend money on such extravagances,
The crapulence of what is actually built for that money is another indictment.
In recent years, we have seen properties torn down as irredeemably defective which are a year or two old.
In some cases *before completion*
So not an objection per se.
Look at the cost of office fit-outs in large private sector businesses. Facilities management procurement is largely the same process regardless of the buying organisation. I suspect the HMRC approach is rather more cheapskate than many of those.
And 9000 Aeron chairs at full retail (yes cheaper, crappier chairs are available and will be inflicted on HMRC's staff) would cost £12 million at retail prices.
https://bsky.app/profile/libdems.org.uk/post/3madyvp3qys2r
2 years so £5.5m a year
70000 employees so about £80 per worker per year.
To be honest, the main problem with a standard government contract is when the government side leaves in onerous provisions and is not flexible enough. E.g. Unlimited liability that the supplier has to price for based on securing insurance, even if it gets no guaranteed work, when a sensible cap might have been negotiated because the risk is low.
I'm only interested (parochially) in the London local elections next year (actually, not just parochially, I can't really comment on much else except for the elections to the two new Shadow Unitaries in Surrey).
In my patch, it's looking increasingly like Labour vs Newham Independents (NIP) with the Greens a strong third. The questions are a) whether Mehmood Mirza can win the mayoralty off Labour and b) whether the NIP can take enough seats to deprive Labour of a majority and whether there's a post-election deal to be done with the Greens.
NIP can easily 15 and possibly 23 seats but they really need 25-30 (with the Greens winning 9-12) and that's a harder one to forecast. Reform will be interesting (18% in Plaistow suggests a constituency but is there enough to win anywhere, even Beckton?) but more as a spoiler for Labour.
Slate. Vellum. Their own blood using quills. That’s what they should have.
Bear in mind, also, the new HMRC building in Newcastle which will accommodate 6,000 people. Also replacing old stock.
I sourced new furniture when we refurbished our offices. A business with 100 staff. It wasn’t cheap and it needed to meet ergonomic requirements. I can easily see this spend being reasonable. It didn’t just include chairs for people but tables, equipment for pods and meeting rooms too.
I don’t think this unreasonable. Do people expect them to stand all day.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/london-cyclist-crash-robert-hazeldean-gemma-brushett-london-phone-court-a8972326.html
With Polish labour. And all the other Eastern Europeans.
It’s a simple thing, that the Victorians understood. Hell, the Medievals had a clue on the subject.
If you have a standard, you get two things. A potentially better product for the consumer. You also create an opportunity for the unscrupulous.
A simple example is the minimum wage. As it goes up, this increases the incentives to pay people less.
During the early 2000s my relative who runs a building company tried to get something done about the following - in whole swathes of London, it was not possible to compete with illegal builders (cash in hand, illegal employment, gross violations of H & S, gross violations of building standards).
Nothing was done - because, as he was told, it was policy to ignore it.
The answer is not to abolish standards. But as those Victorians (and Medievals , with the Guilds) understood, a regulation or a standard is worse than useless without… drum roll… *enforcement*
What you need is simple, clear standards. And teeth in enforcement.
Instead we have had a nearly exponential increase in paperwork. And reductions in enforcement.
Imagine a big site. The Big Builders have actually subcontracted the site to A, who have subcontracted down the alphabet to about Q. Who digs the ditches for the foundation six inches less than plan - quicker, cheaper (less concrete and rebar). This is (largely) because Q is being squeezed on price.
The Big Builders know. But they don’t know in the legal, provable sense.
The inspectors look at the foundations for one house. That’s done properly. The others have been filled with concrete before they got there. So sorry. Just sign here.
When it gets found out, Q has gone out of business (different Ltd for each job).
The US consumer sentiment assessment of current economic conditions has declined to 50.4 points, the lowest level on record.
This is 5 points and 8 points below the lows seen in 2022 and 2008.
By comparison, the index stood 11 points higher in 1980, when annual inflation was at 13.5%.
This comes as Americas' perception of current buying conditions for big-ticket items deteriorated to the lowest level on record.
An ongoing affordability crisis and a weakening labor market continue to weigh on household finances, dragging consumer sentiment lower.
Consumers have rarely been this pessimistic about the economy.
https://x.com/KobeissiLetter/status/2002852263086207169
Unfortunately, as soon as one of these half-stories appears on social media, we get the predictable howls of outrage from the usual suspects moaning about "waste".
It's now a factor in political debate that no one stops, thinks and checks - it's all about the instant emotive response which while revealing in its own way, doesn't help move the argument.