Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
The defence industrial strategy happening in Europe just isn't over here.
Maybe they should transfer skills and production to drones and drone technology.
Any form of military helicopter is just a great big sitting duck.
One nick on a rotor and it's down
Except that
1) They are working on drone technology there 2) The Ukrainians, who are at the forefront of drone warfare, haven't got rid of helicopters. They use them, quite actively.
You can't exactly transport soldiers by drone
It will be a some time before a drone can match the range/speed/payload capability of a helicopter.
So a large drone, powered by a gas turbine, burning jet fuel.
For aerodynamic efficiency, have a single large rotor on top.....
You can make a drone that can the payload of any helicopter. It will just be the size of.... the helicopter.
Not necessarily. There's likely to be a large niche for electric powered, with a large amount of that power provided by on onboard turbine/generator. There are advantages in having multiple rotors powered by electric motors (which are getting more efficient and lighter as they are optimised for flight).
Physics says that large rotors are always more efficient. The larger and slower turning the better.
Proteus (built guess where?) is already helicopter sized.
It's actually a less silly design than the Mil above - which had insane harmonic vibration and airframe flexure issues.
By comparison, a 120 meter rotor with tip jets, turning once a minute, would be simple to debug....
The prototype V-12s outperformed their design specifications, setting numerous world records which still stand today, and brought its designers numerous awards such as the prestigious Sikorsky Prize awarded by the American Helicopter Society for outstanding achievements in helicopter technology. The V-12 design was patented in the United States, United Kingdom, and other countries.[3] Despite all of these achievements the Soviet Air Force refused to accept the helicopter for state acceptance trials for many reasons, the main one being that the V-12's most important intended mission no longer existed, i.e. the rapid deployment of heavy strategic ballistic missiles.
JD Vance: “I do think we have to avoid repeating mistakes of the past. I also think that we have to avoid overlearning lessons of the past. Just because one president screwed up a military conflict doesn’t mean we can never engage in military conflict again.”
I'm struggling to see what Kemi offers that is new. She's the end of a line that starts with May and goes through Boris Truss and Sunak and however you look at it there's nothing that suggests she's an upgrade.
On the contrary. She looks like a lightweight. The odd thing is that unlike Labour I can think of two or possibly three heavyweights who are standing in the wings.
If 2029 comes round and somehow she and Farage are competing for the right wing leadership I can only see one winner
I saw her on Iain Dale on the LBC YouTube channel. She was smirking and looking extremely smug about her "people on the doorstep are telling me Labour is the party of Paedo enablers". David Amess' daughter and Natalie Fleet (who was groomed and raped as a child) condemned this and she basically told them to stfu as Labour started it on Sunak's watch (true- they did) and she didn't intend to stop.
Maybe she is onto a winner.
Telling David Amess daughter to shut the feck up is disgusting. How any Tory can have anything but contempt for that given the circumstances is baffling
I'm glad others have noticed that sly arrogant smirk.
It is an interesting watch. Dale said Ames's daughter asked her to apologise and she said no.
She seems very pleased with herself and she is correct that Labour started it by the Sunak ads before the last election, which were widely and correctly condemned at the time.
If she doesn't think she is in the wrong, why would she apologise because someone who has suffered a personal tragedy says she should? It's an utterly barmy and perverse way to look at the world.
Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
The defence industrial strategy happening in Europe just isn't over here.
Maybe they should transfer skills and production to drones and drone technology.
Any form of military helicopter is just a great big sitting duck.
One nick on a rotor and it's down
Except that
1) They are working on drone technology there 2) The Ukrainians, who are at the forefront of drone warfare, haven't got rid of helicopters. They use them, quite actively.
You can't exactly transport soldiers by drone
It will be a some time before a drone can match the range/speed/payload capability of a helicopter.
So a large drone, powered by a gas turbine, burning jet fuel.
For aerodynamic efficiency, have a single large rotor on top.....
You can make a drone that can the payload of any helicopter. It will just be the size of.... the helicopter.
Not necessarily. There's likely to be a large niche for electric powered, with a large amount of that power provided by on onboard turbine/generator. There are advantages in having multiple rotors powered by electric motors (which are getting more efficient and lighter as they are optimised for flight).
Physics says that large rotors are always more efficient. The larger and slower turning the better.
Proteus (built guess where?) is already helicopter sized.
It's actually a less silly design than the Mil above - which had insane harmonic vibration and airframe flexure issues.
By comparison, a 120 meter rotor with tip jets, turning once a minute, would be simple to debug....
The prototype V-12s outperformed their design specifications, setting numerous world records which still stand today, and brought its designers numerous awards such as the prestigious Sikorsky Prize awarded by the American Helicopter Society for outstanding achievements in helicopter technology. The V-12 design was patented in the United States, United Kingdom, and other countries.[3] Despite all of these achievements the Soviet Air Force refused to accept the helicopter for state acceptance trials for many reasons, the main one being that the V-12's most important intended mission no longer existed, i.e. the rapid deployment of heavy strategic ballistic missiles.
If you read the write-ups from pilots etc it was very, very far from finished. The issue of it rattling itself into instability was a big big issue.
You see this with a lot of Soviet projects. Strangely cancelled, even though it was all world beating and perfect. See Lun and GNOM for other examples.
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Problem is the loony policies.
Which ones?
You can argue that their manifesto commitments are expensive but there are not many that aren't mainstream
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Tentative hypothesis:
Part of Starmer's problem is that, as well as having poor political antennae, he's old.
Childhood in the 60s and 70s, a student and starting his career in the 80s. That has to affect his mental map of right, wrong and the big questions facing the country.
We rightly point and laugh at Reformers and Brexit buccaneers for wanting to turn the clock back to an imagined 1950s idyll. And whilst I'm comfortable saying that Starmer's worldview is more benign than Farage's or Lowe's, it's almost as dated.
Not sure it's a culpable thing; it's not easy to think of a politician who has stayed current as the world has evolved. But it's one of nature's ways of hinting that it's time to leave the stage.
Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
The defence industrial strategy happening in Europe just isn't over here.
Maybe they should transfer skills and production to drones and drone technology.
Any form of military helicopter is just a great big sitting duck.
One nick on a rotor and it's down
Except that
1) They are working on drone technology there 2) The Ukrainians, who are at the forefront of drone warfare, haven't got rid of helicopters. They use them, quite actively.
You can't exactly transport soldiers by drone
It will be a some time before a drone can match the range/speed/payload capability of a helicopter.
So a large drone, powered by a gas turbine, burning jet fuel.
For aerodynamic efficiency, have a single large rotor on top.....
You can make a drone that can the payload of any helicopter. It will just be the size of.... the helicopter.
Not necessarily. There's likely to be a large niche for electric powered, with a large amount of that power provided by on onboard turbine/generator. There are advantages in having multiple rotors powered by electric motors (which are getting more efficient and lighter as they are optimised for flight).
Physics says that large rotors are always more efficient. The larger and slower turning the better.
Proteus (built guess where?) is already helicopter sized.
It's actually a less silly design than the Mil above - which had insane harmonic vibration and airframe flexure issues.
By comparison, a 120 meter rotor with tip jets, turning once a minute, would be simple to debug....
The prototype V-12s outperformed their design specifications, setting numerous world records which still stand today, and brought its designers numerous awards such as the prestigious Sikorsky Prize awarded by the American Helicopter Society for outstanding achievements in helicopter technology. The V-12 design was patented in the United States, United Kingdom, and other countries.[3] Despite all of these achievements the Soviet Air Force refused to accept the helicopter for state acceptance trials for many reasons, the main one being that the V-12's most important intended mission no longer existed, i.e. the rapid deployment of heavy strategic ballistic missiles.
If you read the write-ups from pilots etc it was very, very far from finished. The issue of it rattling itself into instability was a big big issue.
You see this with a lot of Soviet projects. Strangely cancelled, even though it was all world beating and perfect. See Lun and GNOM for other examples.
In Sunil's wikipedia link the rivets in the cockpit suggest there might have been a bit of vibration
I'm struggling to see what Kemi offers that is new. She's the end of a line that starts with May and goes through Boris Truss and Sunak and however you look at it there's nothing that suggests she's an upgrade.
On the contrary. She looks like a lightweight. The odd thing is that unlike Labour I can think of two or possibly three heavyweights who are standing in the wings.
If 2029 comes round and somehow she and Farage are competing for the right wing leadership I can only see one winner
I saw her on Iain Dale on the LBC YouTube channel. She was smirking and looking extremely smug about her "people on the doorstep are telling me Labour is the party of Paedo enablers". David Amess' daughter and Natalie Fleet (who was groomed and raped as a child) condemned this and she basically told them to stfu as Labour started it on Sunak's watch (true- they did) and she didn't intend to stop.
Maybe she is onto a winner.
Telling David Amess daughter to shut the feck up is disgusting. How any Tory can have anything but contempt for that given the circumstances is baffling
I'm glad others have noticed that sly arrogant smirk.
It is an interesting watch. Dale said Ames's daughter asked her to apologise and she said no.
She seems very pleased with herself and she is correct that Labour started it by the Sunak ads before the last election, which were widely and correctly condemned at the time.
If she doesn't think she is in the wrong, why would she apologise because someone who has suffered a personal tragedy says she should? It's an utterly barmy and perverse way to look at the world.
There is a weird culture where relatives of people who have died in bad ways are given a strange level of deference to solutions and culture than others. Whilst it’s horrific what people go through the relatives can tell of the damage and pain but they aren’t infallible on the subject.
As a usual non betting person are there odds quoted for the Greens not to get the highest no of seats. I'd like some of that.
Betfair exchange, you can lay them at 7.6 for most seats at next GE. Which is a surprisingly generous 15% return. They are currently shorter than both Cons and LDs. Could those people on Restore Britain not find a charity bucket?
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Tentative hypothesis:
Part of Starmer's problem is that, as well as having poor political antennae, he's old.
Childhood in the 60s and 70s, a student and starting his career in the 80s. That has to affect his mental map of right, wrong and the big questions facing the country.
We rightly point and laugh at Reformers and Brexit buccaneers for wanting to turn the clock back to an imagined 1950s idyll. And whilst I'm comfortable saying that Starmer's worldview is more benign than Farage's or Lowe's, it's almost as dated.
Not sure it's a culpable thing; it's not easy to think of a politician who has stayed current as the world has evolved. But it's one of nature's ways of hinting that it's time to leave the stage.
Very interesting point. I wonder if that's also true for Party activists (all parties) and campaigners in the Third Sector.
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Her victory speech was great in terms of articulating the Greens' message in terms that anybody can understand. She is not wrong in identifying stagnating or declining standards of living as the central problem afflicting the country. Since the global financial crisis living standards have stagnated in the UK. This is a problem across the West but the UK has fared worse than most. Factors like Brexit and Ukraine haven't helped. The problem is that the Greens' diagnosis of the problem ("billionaires") and preferred solution (tax the rich more) won't work, just as Reform's diagnosis ("foreigners") and solution (kick out the foreigners) won't work either. I can't pretend there are any easy answers or painless remedies but I do know that populism of either left or right variety will only make things worse. At the same time I can understand why voters are searching for different solutions.
"The Department of War has stated they will only contract with AI companies who accede to “any lawful use” and remove safeguards in the cases mentioned above. They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk”—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels us a security risk; the other labels Claude as essential to national security.
Regardless, these threats do not change our position: we cannot in good conscience accede to their request."
I admit I had expected them just to give in under protest.
I'm struggling to see what Kemi offers that is new. She's the end of a line that starts with May and goes through Boris Truss and Sunak and however you look at it there's nothing that suggests she's an upgrade.
On the contrary. She looks like a lightweight. The odd thing is that unlike Labour I can think of two or possibly three heavyweights who are standing in the wings.
If 2029 comes round and somehow she and Farage are competing for the right wing leadership I can only see one winner
I saw her on Iain Dale on the LBC YouTube channel. She was smirking and looking extremely smug about her "people on the doorstep are telling me Labour is the party of Paedo enablers". David Amess' daughter and Natalie Fleet (who was groomed and raped as a child) condemned this and she basically told them to stfu as Labour started it on Sunak's watch (true- they did) and she didn't intend to stop.
Maybe she is onto a winner.
I didn't see that but there's a childish element to her which grates badly. Truss also had it though not so obviously. I've just seen Zack answer a load of quite aggressive questions from -I think Sky-and he was good. There's no doubt if she doesn't want to be shown the door she'll have to stop being a smart arse and start looking like a leader.
Watch the Tory Mos on the back 2 rows on Wednesday when she lost the plot
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Her victory speech was great in terms of articulating the Greens' message in terms that anybody can understand. She is not wrong in identifying stagnating or declining standards of living as the central problem afflicting the country. Since the global financial crisis living standards have stagnated in the UK. This is a problem across the West but the UK has fared worse than most. Factors like Brexit and Ukraine haven't helped. The problem is that the Greens' diagnosis of the problem ("billionaires") and preferred solution (tax the rich more) won't work, just as Reform's diagnosis ("foreigners") and solution (kick out the foreigners) won't work either. I can't pretend there are any easy answers or painless remedies but I do know that populism of either left or right variety will only make things worse. At the same time I can understand why voters are searching for different solutions.
Her “working person” victory speech, whilst not my cup of tea, is what you would expect from serious old Labour. She’s a more photogenic Rayner but with a more authentic working background being a plumber rather than Trade Unions to Politics route. If she had been in the Labour Party as an MP for six or more years she would likely be a front runner for the left in any leadership battle.
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Tentative hypothesis:
Part of Starmer's problem is that, as well as having poor political antennae, he's old.
Childhood in the 60s and 70s, a student and starting his career in the 80s. That has to affect his mental map of right, wrong and the big questions facing the country.
We rightly point and laugh at Reformers and Brexit buccaneers for wanting to turn the clock back to an imagined 1950s idyll. And whilst I'm comfortable saying that Starmer's worldview is more benign than Farage's or Lowe's, it's almost as dated.
Not sure it's a culpable thing; it's not easy to think of a politician who has stayed current as the world has evolved. But it's one of nature's ways of hinting that it's time to leave the stage.
Very interesting point. I wonder if that's also true for Party activists (all parties) and campaigners in the Third Sector.
I think it is true of all parties.
It really isn't too much of a surprise that they struggle to engage with the under 40's.
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
I think there is a good route to victory for Tories or Labour of positioning as a “sensible party” with policies that can actually be delivered in the real world, fiscal sanity and a big focus on the young and on housing. Solve that and you can come through the centre as an upcoming election will focus minds on whether they want an unknown quantity with wild policies (greens/reform) or centrists who have seen the light.
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
I disagree. It is possible to move left on many social and environmental issues without frightening the economic horses.
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Tentative hypothesis:
Part of Starmer's problem is that, as well as having poor political antennae, he's old.
Childhood in the 60s and 70s, a student and starting his career in the 80s. That has to affect his mental map of right, wrong and the big questions facing the country.
We rightly point and laugh at Reformers and Brexit buccaneers for wanting to turn the clock back to an imagined 1950s idyll. And whilst I'm comfortable saying that Starmer's worldview is more benign than Farage's or Lowe's, it's almost as dated.
Not sure it's a culpable thing; it's not easy to think of a politician who has stayed current as the world has evolved. But it's one of nature's ways of hinting that it's time to leave the stage.
Very interesting point. I wonder if that's also true for Party activists (all parties) and campaigners in the Third Sector.
I think it is true of all parties.
It really isn't too much of a surprise that they struggle to engage with the under 40's.
Yep. And the fact that they seem comfortable with ascribing a Green victory to Islamism and sectarianism doesn't suggest they are willing to try. Fact is. The Greens lead with voters under 65. Describing them all as loons is basket of deplorables level of political strategy.
Activists target lawyers with book: 'Why Daddy’s Law Firm Works With The Nice Oil Men’
A climate change pressure group has targeted lawyers with a satirical children’s book intended to make them rethink their evil career choices.
Serious People is sending copies of Why Daddy’s Law Firm Works With The Nice Oil Men to "top oil and gas lawyers across London" today, it told RollOnFriday.
ROF’s been treated to a preview copy and can confirm it’s guaranteed to delight every child of a solicitor in the energy sector. Though mums may feel slighted by the insinuation they don’t get instructions from BP as well.
Recipients expecting a valedictory story of a heroic energy lawyer earning the respect of his offspring will be disappointed. As the blurb explains, “On a chilly winter night, a little penguin dared to wonder: if Daddy loves me, why does his law firm facilitate fossil fuel expansion?”
The book depicts a solicitor penguin getting badgered to change his ways by his idealistic brat of a child, who doesn’t appreciate that although their antarctic habitat may get wiped out if dad carries on taking the oily dollar, the family can afford to relocate thanks to his hard work.
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
I think there is a good route to victory for Tories or Labour of positioning as a “sensible party” with policies that can actually be delivered in the real world, fiscal sanity and a big focus on the young and on housing. Solve that and you can come through the centre as an upcoming election will focus minds on whether they want an unknown quantity with wild policies (greens/reform) or centrists who have seen the light.
Unfortunately solving that involves greatly inconveniencing the winners from the present arrangements. And they are the only people currently voting for the legacy Parties.
I'm struggling to see what Kemi offers that is new. She's the end of a line that starts with May and goes through Boris Truss and Sunak and however you look at it there's nothing that suggests she's an upgrade.
On the contrary. She looks like a lightweight. The odd thing is that unlike Labour I can think of two or possibly three heavyweights who are standing in the wings.
If 2029 comes round and somehow she and Farage are competing for the right wing leadership I can only see one winner
I saw her on Iain Dale on the LBC YouTube channel. She was smirking and looking extremely smug about her "people on the doorstep are telling me Labour is the party of Paedo enablers". David Amess' daughter and Natalie Fleet (who was groomed and raped as a child) condemned this and she basically told them to stfu as Labour started it on Sunak's watch (true- they did) and she didn't intend to stop.
Maybe she is onto a winner.
Telling David Amess daughter to shut the feck up is disgusting. How any Tory can have anything but contempt for that given the circumstances is baffling
I'm glad others have noticed that sly arrogant smirk.
It is an interesting watch. Dale said Ames's daughter asked her to apologise and she said no.
She seems very pleased with herself and she is correct that Labour started it by the Sunak ads before the last election, which were widely and correctly condemned at the time.
If she doesn't think she is in the wrong, why would she apologise because someone who has suffered a personal tragedy says she should? It's an utterly barmy and perverse way to look at the world.
She agrees Labour were irresponsibly wrong to suggest Sunak was a paedo enabler, and she is correct, yet she doesn't believe she is wrong this time around.
Dale was suggesting she was promoting a culture of potential violence against MPs and her reply was to the effect of "so what? Labour started it".
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
"There's only one Angela Rayner".*
* Thank goodness? I'd give her a shot at greatness. It might work, it might go wrong.
Activists target lawyers with book: 'Why Daddy’s Law Firm Works With The Nice Oil Men’
A climate change pressure group has targeted lawyers with a satirical children’s book intended to make them rethink their evil career choices.
Serious People is sending copies of Why Daddy’s Law Firm Works With The Nice Oil Men to "top oil and gas lawyers across London" today, it told RollOnFriday.
ROF’s been treated to a preview copy and can confirm it’s guaranteed to delight every child of a solicitor in the energy sector. Though mums may feel slighted by the insinuation they don’t get instructions from BP as well.
Recipients expecting a valedictory story of a heroic energy lawyer earning the respect of his offspring will be disappointed. As the blurb explains, “On a chilly winter night, a little penguin dared to wonder: if Daddy loves me, why does his law firm facilitate fossil fuel expansion?”
The book depicts a solicitor penguin getting badgered to change his ways by his idealistic brat of a child, who doesn’t appreciate that although their antarctic habitat may get wiped out if dad carries on taking the oily dollar, the family can afford to relocate thanks to his hard work.
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
I think there is a good route to victory for Tories or Labour of positioning as a “sensible party” with policies that can actually be delivered in the real world, fiscal sanity and a big focus on the young and on housing. Solve that and you can come through the centre as an upcoming election will focus minds on whether they want an unknown quantity with wild policies (greens/reform) or centrists who have seen the light.
Unfortunately solving that involves greatly inconveniencing the winners from the present arrangements. And they are the only people currently voting for the legacy Parties.
But those previous “winners” potentially stand to lose a lot more from the alternatives and so bravery could be rewarded if it’s spelled out clearly that this is about voters, voters children, grandchildren and those to come.
Clearly future generations are in voters minds based on IHT being a tricky balance. Call their bluff - do you want your grandchildren growing up where crack is available from the chemist or we are rounding up foreigners like ICE (I exaggerate for effect).
I want to see some bravery in politics. There is enough time to the next GE to spell out the truth and reason with voters. If this is impossible then the UK is fucked anyway so may as well keep circling the plug hole.
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
I think there is a good route to victory for Tories or Labour of positioning as a “sensible party” with policies that can actually be delivered in the real world, fiscal sanity and a big focus on the young and on housing. Solve that and you can come through the centre as an upcoming election will focus minds on whether they want an unknown quantity with wild policies (greens/reform) or centrists who have seen the light.
Unfortunately solving that involves greatly inconveniencing the winners from the present arrangements. And they are the only people currently voting for the legacy Parties.
But those previous “winners” potentially stand to lose a lot more from the alternatives and so bravery could be rewarded if it’s spelled out clearly that this is about voters, voters children, grandchildren and those to come.
Clearly future generations are in voters minds based on IHT being a tricky balance. Call their bluff - do you want your grandchildren growing up where crack is available from the chemist or we are rounding up foreigners like ICE (I exaggerate for effect).
I want to see some bravery in politics. There is enough time to the next GE to spell out the truth and reason with voters. If this is impossible then the UK is fucked anyway so may as well keep circling the plug hole.
It's hard to spell things out clearly in a world of social media algorithms.
Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
The defence industrial strategy happening in Europe just isn't over here.
Maybe they should transfer skills and production to drones and drone technology.
Any form of military helicopter is just a great big sitting duck.
One nick on a rotor and it's down
Except that
1) They are working on drone technology there 2) The Ukrainians, who are at the forefront of drone warfare, haven't got rid of helicopters. They use them, quite actively.
You can't exactly transport soldiers by drone
Article from Nov 2025 about Ukraine evacuating wounded by ground drone.
As a usual non betting person are there odds quoted for the Greens not to get the highest no of seats. I'd like some of that.
Betfair exchange, you can lay them at 7.6 for most seats at next GE. Which is a surprisingly generous 15% return. They are currently shorter than both Cons and LDs. Could those people on Restore Britain not find a charity bucket?
15% total return over probably 3 and half years is not that different to what you'd get in a 4% annualised savings account plus your money isn't tied up or at risk.
Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
The defence industrial strategy happening in Europe just isn't over here.
Maybe they should transfer skills and production to drones and drone technology.
Any form of military helicopter is just a great big sitting duck.
One nick on a rotor and it's down
Except that
1) They are working on drone technology there 2) The Ukrainians, who are at the forefront of drone warfare, haven't got rid of helicopters. They use them, quite actively.
You can't exactly transport soldiers by drone
Article from Nov 2025 about Ukraine evacuating wounded by ground drone.
Yup - a big drone that acts as a very short ranged flying stretcher. The Russians even complained that one of their wounded was "kidnapped" from the battlefield by one.
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
I think there is a good route to victory for Tories or Labour of positioning as a “sensible party” with policies that can actually be delivered in the real world, fiscal sanity and a big focus on the young and on housing. Solve that and you can come through the centre as an upcoming election will focus minds on whether they want an unknown quantity with wild policies (greens/reform) or centrists who have seen the light.
Unfortunately solving that involves greatly inconveniencing the winners from the present arrangements. And they are the only people currently voting for the legacy Parties.
But those previous “winners” potentially stand to lose a lot more from the alternatives and so bravery could be rewarded if it’s spelled out clearly that this is about voters, voters children, grandchildren and those to come.
Clearly future generations are in voters minds based on IHT being a tricky balance. Call their bluff - do you want your grandchildren growing up where crack is available from the chemist or we are rounding up foreigners like ICE (I exaggerate for effect).
I want to see some bravery in politics. There is enough time to the next GE to spell out the truth and reason with voters. If this is impossible then the UK is fucked anyway so may as well keep circling the plug hole.
what's the problem with getting crack from the chemist? we all like a bit of joke and a laugh in our working day
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
I think there is a good route to victory for Tories or Labour of positioning as a “sensible party” with policies that can actually be delivered in the real world, fiscal sanity and a big focus on the young and on housing. Solve that and you can come through the centre as an upcoming election will focus minds on whether they want an unknown quantity with wild policies (greens/reform) or centrists who have seen the light.
Unfortunately solving that involves greatly inconveniencing the winners from the present arrangements. And they are the only people currently voting for the legacy Parties.
But those previous “winners” potentially stand to lose a lot more from the alternatives and so bravery could be rewarded if it’s spelled out clearly that this is about voters, voters children, grandchildren and those to come.
Clearly future generations are in voters minds based on IHT being a tricky balance. Call their bluff - do you want your grandchildren growing up where crack is available from the chemist or we are rounding up foreigners like ICE (I exaggerate for effect).
I want to see some bravery in politics. There is enough time to the next GE to spell out the truth and reason with voters. If this is impossible then the UK is fucked anyway so may as well keep circling the plug hole.
It's hard to spell things out clearly in a world of social media algorithms.
Then instead of resources on ground game redirect them online and win that argument on the battlefield that it actually is on. They have the money to hire people who know how to do it. Flood socials but also get out there repeating the message loud and clear in a way that is honest and people might take notice. If Kemi, for example, starts telling the unvarnished truth it will have traction because voters see a politician being straight.
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
I disagree. It is possible to move left on many social and environmental issues without frightening the economic horses.
Worked for Cameron, at least in the runup to 2010. At least as a campaigning theme, if less so in government.
(There's an age cutoff somewhere. Not totally binary, but pretty sharp. It separates people for who all these social questions are undead debates from those who are frankly baffled that anyone can question the rightness of social reform.)
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Problem is the loony policies.
They are a mix.
Green energy remains entirely sensible.
But I'm with you that "no growth" is bonkers in a Green worldview, because we are continually cutting the Energy and Emissions Density of our GDP.
And the drugs policies, which have been savagely attacked have a possible logic if explored, and unwrapped from the rhetoric. The similar policies in Portugal over several decades seem to be effective.
I'm interested that the other parties have gone quiet on Hypno Boobjob.
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Tentative hypothesis:
Part of Starmer's problem is that, as well as having poor political antennae, he's old.
Childhood in the 60s and 70s, a student and starting his career in the 80s. That has to affect his mental map of right, wrong and the big questions facing the country.
We rightly point and laugh at Reformers and Brexit buccaneers for wanting to turn the clock back to an imagined 1950s idyll. And whilst I'm comfortable saying that Starmer's worldview is more benign than Farage's or Lowe's, it's almost as dated.
Not sure it's a culpable thing; it's not easy to think of a politician who has stayed current as the world has evolved. But it's one of nature's ways of hinting that it's time to leave the stage.
Very interesting point. I wonder if that's also true for Party activists (all parties) and campaigners in the Third Sector.
I think it is true of all parties.
It really isn't too much of a surprise that they struggle to engage with the under 40's.
Yep. And the fact that they seem comfortable with ascribing a Green victory to Islamism and sectarianism doesn't suggest they are willing to try. Fact is. The Greens lead with voters under 65. Describing them all as loons is basket of deplorables level of political strategy.
Not everyone in Labour has reacted well to Starmers letter. Clive Lewis here for example:
As a usual non betting person are there odds quoted for the Greens not to get the highest no of seats. I'd like some of that.
Betfair exchange, you can lay them at 7.6 for most seats at next GE. Which is a surprisingly generous 15% return. They are currently shorter than both Cons and LDs. Could those people on Restore Britain not find a charity bucket?
15% total return over probably 3 and half years is not that different to what you'd get in a 4% annualised savings account plus your money isn't tied up or at risk.
Don't misunderestimate the value of bragging rights on PB.
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
I disagree. It is possible to move left on many social and environmental issues without frightening the economic horses.
It's totally possible (I'd like to see it) but my point isn't really that. I'm saying it's not a key requirement for improving Labour's election prospects. A move left won't make it any more likely the economy picks up, and whatever the change of direction is it won't make much difference unless there's a leader who can sell it.
As a usual non betting person are there odds quoted for the Greens not to get the highest no of seats. I'd like some of that.
Betfair exchange, you can lay them at 7.6 for most seats at next GE. Which is a surprisingly generous 15% return. They are currently shorter than both Cons and LDs. Could those people on Restore Britain not find a charity bucket?
15% total return over probably 3 and half years is not that different to what you'd get in a 4% annualised savings account plus your money isn't tied up or at risk.
That depends on whether you’re already in that market. I’m already laid on Reform most seats, so laying Green most seats now actually increases my account balance and hence frees up, rather than commits, funds. But of course, the odds might be even more favourable after the local elections.
Re Labour needing to move Left, it would suit me fine but I really don't think so. The single biggest thing they need is the economy to outperform trend and expectations over the next two to three years. Changing political orientation leftwards, or rightwards for that matter, makes this no more likely than it is now. So I'd resist that sort of reaction until they've sorted out the other single biggest thing they need to do - replace Keir Starmer with a better communicator and cannier politician. The 'new' political direction should flow from whoever that is and they do not have to come from any particular wing of the party. From the pov of next GE prospects the vision itself is less important than the ability to sell it.
"There's only one Angela Rayner".*
* Thank goodness? I'd give her a shot at greatness. It might work, it might go wrong.
As a usual non betting person are there odds quoted for the Greens not to get the highest no of seats. I'd like some of that.
Betfair exchange, you can lay them at 7.6 for most seats at next GE. Which is a surprisingly generous 15% return. They are currently shorter than both Cons and LDs. Could those people on Restore Britain not find a charity bucket?
15% total return over probably 3 and half years is not that different to what you'd get in a 4% annualised savings account plus your money isn't tied up or at risk.
Don't misunderestimate the value of bragging rights on PB.
Almost as good as Green Shield Stamps - when's the catalogue being issued @tse?
The lines from PM and Cabinet today essentially labelling the Green Party as extremist is appalling, desperate and frankly embarrassing. It also makes very clear that the leadership has zero understanding of where it has been going wrong.
The party is being destroyed & an urgent change of direction is needed.
I'm struggling to see what Kemi offers that is new. She's the end of a line that starts with May and goes through Boris Truss and Sunak and however you look at it there's nothing that suggests she's an upgrade.
On the contrary. She looks like a lightweight. The odd thing is that unlike Labour I can think of two or possibly three heavyweights who are standing in the wings.
If 2029 comes round and somehow she and Farage are competing for the right wing leadership I can only see one winner
I saw her on Iain Dale on the LBC YouTube channel. She was smirking and looking extremely smug about her "people on the doorstep are telling me Labour is the party of Paedo enablers". David Amess' daughter and Natalie Fleet (who was groomed and raped as a child) condemned this and she basically told them to stfu as Labour started it on Sunak's watch (true- they did) and she didn't intend to stop.
Maybe she is onto a winner.
I didn't see that but there's a childish element to her which grates badly. Truss also had it though not so obviously. I've just seen Zack answer a load of quite aggressive questions from -I think Sky-and he was good. There's no doubt if she doesn't want to be shown the door she'll have to stop being a smart arse and start looking like a leader.
Watch the Tory Mos on the back 2 rows on Wednesday when she lost the plot
I'm struggling to see what Kemi offers that is new. She's the end of a line that starts with May and goes through Boris Truss and Sunak and however you look at it there's nothing that suggests she's an upgrade.
On the contrary. She looks like a lightweight. The odd thing is that unlike Labour I can think of two or possibly three heavyweights who are standing in the wings.
If 2029 comes round and somehow she and Farage are competing for the right wing leadership I can only see one winner
I saw her on Iain Dale on the LBC YouTube channel. She was smirking and looking extremely smug about her "people on the doorstep are telling me Labour is the party of Paedo enablers". David Amess' daughter and Natalie Fleet (who was groomed and raped as a child) condemned this and she basically told them to stfu as Labour started it on Sunak's watch (true- they did) and she didn't intend to stop.
Maybe she is onto a winner.
I didn't see that but there's a childish element to her which grates badly. Truss also had it though not so obviously. I've just seen Zack answer a load of quite aggressive questions from -I think Sky-and he was good. There's no doubt if she doesn't want to be shown the door she'll have to stop being a smart arse and start looking like a leader.
Watch the Tory Mos on the back 2 rows on Wednesday when she lost the plot
I'm struggling to see what Kemi offers that is new. She's the end of a line that starts with May and goes through Boris Truss and Sunak and however you look at it there's nothing that suggests she's an upgrade.
On the contrary. She looks like a lightweight. The odd thing is that unlike Labour I can think of two or possibly three heavyweights who are standing in the wings.
If 2029 comes round and somehow she and Farage are competing for the right wing leadership I can only see one winner
I saw her on Iain Dale on the LBC YouTube channel. She was smirking and looking extremely smug about her "people on the doorstep are telling me Labour is the party of Paedo enablers". David Amess' daughter and Natalie Fleet (who was groomed and raped as a child) condemned this and she basically told them to stfu as Labour started it on Sunak's watch (true- they did) and she didn't intend to stop.
Maybe she is onto a winner.
I didn't see that but there's a childish element to her which grates badly. Truss also had it though not so obviously. I've just seen Zack answer a load of quite aggressive questions from -I think Sky-and he was good. There's no doubt if she doesn't want to be shown the door she'll have to stop being a smart arse and start looking like a leader.
Watch the Tory Mos on the back 2 rows on Wednesday when she lost the plot
I cannot quite believe that the CPS appealed this in the first place. I know they say in the article there was no law to prosecute people for blasphemy and that's not what they did, but the initial charge they sought to make shows the criticism that it was blasphemy 'via the back door' was a valid one.
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Trump: "We could very well end up having a friendly takeover of Cuba."
It would make more sense Cuba being part of the US than Greenland being part of the US. And just think of all those lovely Trump resorts they could build.
The lines from PM and Cabinet today essentially labelling the Green Party as extremist is appalling, desperate and frankly embarrassing. It also makes very clear that the leadership has zero understanding of where it has been going wrong.
The party is being destroyed & an urgent change of direction is needed.
Couldn’t agree more with Mr Byrne .
Beating on Labour voters and then expecting them to come rushing back at the next GE is delusional.
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Problem is the loony policies.
They are a mix.
Green energy remains entirely sensible.
But I'm with you that "no growth" is bonkers in a Green worldview, because we are continually cutting the Energy and Emissions Density of our GDP.
And the drugs policies, which have been savagely attacked have a possible logic if explored, and unwrapped from the rhetoric. The similar policies in Portugal over several decades seem to be effective.
I'm interested that the other parties have gone quiet on Hypno Boobjob.
No growth isn't entirely bonkers, particularly in a world run by AI. If it means we can all work three day weeks and generally have more fun then that's brilliant for human welfare, but potentially neutral for GDP.
Estimates vary but a large proportion of productivity growth in the 20th century was transferred to weekends, 9 to 5 etc etc. In theory that proportion should grow.
Why is Afghanistan always fighting is perhaps more the question to be asking?
And why are the Taliban seemingly the only ones who get what counts locally as (horrible) stability? Sheer brutality, genuine popularity, better outside support, what?
I'm struggling to see what Kemi offers that is new. She's the end of a line that starts with May and goes through Boris Truss and Sunak and however you look at it there's nothing that suggests she's an upgrade.
On the contrary. She looks like a lightweight. The odd thing is that unlike Labour I can think of two or possibly three heavyweights who are standing in the wings.
If 2029 comes round and somehow she and Farage are competing for the right wing leadership I can only see one winner
I saw her on Iain Dale on the LBC YouTube channel. She was smirking and looking extremely smug about her "people on the doorstep are telling me Labour is the party of Paedo enablers". David Amess' daughter and Natalie Fleet (who was groomed and raped as a child) condemned this and she basically told them to stfu as Labour started it on Sunak's watch (true- they did) and she didn't intend to stop.
Maybe she is onto a winner.
Telling David Amess daughter to shut the feck up is disgusting. How any Tory can have anything but contempt for that given the circumstances is baffling
I'm glad others have noticed that sly arrogant smirk.
It is an interesting watch. Dale said Ames's daughter asked her to apologise and she said no.
She seems very pleased with herself and she is correct that Labour started it by the Sunak ads before the last election, which were widely and correctly condemned at the time.
If she doesn't think she is in the wrong, why would she apologise because someone who has suffered a personal tragedy says she should? It's an utterly barmy and perverse way to look at the world.
She agrees Labour were irresponsibly wrong to suggest Sunak was a paedo enabler, and she is correct, yet she doesn't believe she is wrong this time around.
Dale was suggesting she was promoting a culture of potential violence against MPs and her reply was to the effect of "so what? Labour started it".
Thats her problem.
Engage gob
Engage brain oops can't find one
God forbid any MP of any Party gets attacked. They will play that clip back over and over.
The lines from PM and Cabinet today essentially labelling the Green Party as extremist is appalling, desperate and frankly embarrassing. It also makes very clear that the leadership has zero understanding of where it has been going wrong.
The party is being destroyed & an urgent change of direction is needed.
Couldn’t agree more with Mr Byrne .
Beating on Labour voters and then expecting them to come rushing back at the next GE is delusional.
They certainly rival Truss for worst government comms in history, and possibly win on the basis Truss only maintained her delusion for a few weeks.
I think Labour have been out of power for so long they have forgotten that when in power they have to tell us about the positive things they do. Oh and that is easier if you actually do some stuff too.
The lines from PM and Cabinet today essentially labelling the Green Party as extremist is appalling, desperate and frankly embarrassing. It also makes very clear that the leadership has zero understanding of where it has been going wrong.
The party is being destroyed & an urgent change of direction is needed.
Does he explain the first step of this change of direction? The time for coyness is past.
The sectariani line could indeed age quite badly. As soon as the Greens start winning by-electioms with low minority populations, in fact, which will surely be again quite soon.
Thanks for the cooking tips from various posters. Perhaps I could integrate sandalwood into tonight's lentils and chicken somehow, to complete the ecological theme.
Why is Afghanistan always fighting is perhaps more the question to be asking?
And why are the Taliban seemingly the only ones who get what counts locally as (horrible) stability? Sheer brutality, genuine popularity, better outside support, what?
The lines from PM and Cabinet today essentially labelling the Green Party as extremist is appalling, desperate and frankly embarrassing. It also makes very clear that the leadership has zero understanding of where it has been going wrong.
The party is being destroyed & an urgent change of direction is needed.
Does he explain the first step of this change of direction? The time for coyness is past.
Put it this way.
Ian Byrne is on the Long-Bailey/Burgon wing of the party.
We've had practically zero GDP per capita growth for ages now, so it seems the Tories and Labour have been ahead of the Greens on their "no growth" policy.
The sectariani line could indeed age quite badly. As soon as the Greens start winning by-electioms with low minority populations, in fact, which will surely happen again quite soon.
Thanks for the cooking tips from various posters. Perhaps I could integrate sandalwood into tonight's lentils and chicken somehow, to complete the ecological theme.
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Problem is the loony policies.
They are a mix.
Green energy remains entirely sensible.
But I'm with you that "no growth" is bonkers in a Green worldview, because we are continually cutting the Energy and Emissions Density of our GDP.
And the drugs policies, which have been savagely attacked have a possible logic if explored, and unwrapped from the rhetoric. The similar policies in Portugal over several decades seem to be effective.
I'm interested that the other parties have gone quiet on Hypno Boobjob.
No growth isn't entirely bonkers, particularly in a world run by AI. If it means we can all work three day weeks and generally have more fun then that's brilliant for human welfare, but potentially neutral for GDP.
Estimates vary but a large proportion of productivity growth in the 20th century was transferred to weekends, 9 to 5 etc etc. In theory that proportion should grow.
Don't forget the extended pre-adulthood and retirement.
He'd be a great choice, since even if he leads the party to a recovery he's losing his seat next time anyway, so you don't have to worry about him overstaying his welcome.
Google "Khorasan" (a putative greater Afghanistan) or "Pashtunistan" (a smaller version) Google "Durand Line" (a border Afghanistan no longer recognises)
Afghanistan has two factions: the Taliban (in charge) and another (even more extreme). The problem is Khorasan/Greater Afghanistan and the relations with Pakistan. Afghanistan wants to be bigger and the tension is how does it do that. This has been building for some years and about two years ago the Taliban was seen as the moderate partner (!), but recently tensions have built again and I think the Durand Line is no longer recognised.
The sectariani line could indeed age quite badly. As soon as the Greens start winning by-electioms with low minority populations, in fact, which will surely happen again quite soon.
Thanks for the cooking tips from various posters. Perhaps I could integrate sandalwood into tonight's lentils and chicken somehow, to complete the ecological theme.
Is it vegan??
Er..this is a good point, that I hadn't sufficiently considered. Chicken isn't very vegan; maybe I should get in some lab-grown chicken mcnuggets from California, and then mix them with the lentils.
The lines from PM and Cabinet today essentially labelling the Green Party as extremist is appalling, desperate and frankly embarrassing. It also makes very clear that the leadership has zero understanding of where it has been going wrong.
The party is being destroyed & an urgent change of direction is needed.
Does he explain the first step of this change of direction? The time for coyness is past.
Put it this way.
Ian Byrne is on the Long-Bailey/Burgon wing of the party.
Why havent the wrong-daily's left for your party or the Greens?
I'm struggling to see what Kemi offers that is new. She's the end of a line that starts with May and goes through Boris Truss and Sunak and however you look at it there's nothing that suggests she's an upgrade.
On the contrary. She looks like a lightweight. The odd thing is that unlike Labour I can think of two or possibly three heavyweights who are standing in the wings.
If 2029 comes round and somehow she and Farage are competing for the right wing leadership I can only see one winner
I saw her on Iain Dale on the LBC YouTube channel. She was smirking and looking extremely smug about her "people on the doorstep are telling me Labour is the party of Paedo enablers". David Amess' daughter and Natalie Fleet (who was groomed and raped as a child) condemned this and she basically told them to stfu as Labour started it on Sunak's watch (true- they did) and she didn't intend to stop.
Maybe she is onto a winner.
Telling David Amess daughter to shut the feck up is disgusting. How any Tory can have anything but contempt for that given the circumstances is baffling
I'm glad others have noticed that sly arrogant smirk.
It is an interesting watch. Dale said Ames's daughter asked her to apologise and she said no.
She seems very pleased with herself and she is correct that Labour started it by the Sunak ads before the last election, which were widely and correctly condemned at the time.
If she doesn't think she is in the wrong, why would she apologise because someone who has suffered a personal tragedy says she should? It's an utterly barmy and perverse way to look at the world.
Kemi was quoting a Labour MP, not making the accusation herself. Why should David Amess's daughter be more entitled to an apology than anyone else? Her father's murder was appalling, but that doesn't mean we have to agree with everything she says as the left do with Doreen Lawrence & Brendan Cox
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Problem is the loony policies.
They are a mix.
Green energy remains entirely sensible.
But I'm with you that "no growth" is bonkers in a Green worldview, because we are continually cutting the Energy and Emissions Density of our GDP.
And the drugs policies, which have been savagely attacked have a possible logic if explored, and unwrapped from the rhetoric. The similar policies in Portugal over several decades seem to be effective.
I'm interested that the other parties have gone quiet on Hypno Boobjob.
No growth isn't entirely bonkers, particularly in a world run by AI. If it means we can all work three day weeks and generally have more fun then that's brilliant for human welfare, but potentially neutral for GDP.
Estimates vary but a large proportion of productivity growth in the 20th century was transferred to weekends, 9 to 5 etc etc. In theory that proportion should grow.
Don't forget the extended pre-adulthood and retirement.
I get the sense, though I don’t know the statistics, that after years of British white collar workers doing longer and longer hours the tide turned after the financial crisis, and we have - through choice rather than government edict - moved to something closer to a 9-5 culture again.
In my early career the office would be busy until sometime between 6.30 and 7. Nowadays by 6 it’s already emptying out.
He'd be a great choice, since even if he leads the party to a recovery he's losing his seat next time anyway, so you don't have to worry about him overstaying his welcome.
Probably last chance saloon for the right of Labour. If not Wes we have 3 years of comedy socialism ahead
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Problem is the loony policies.
They are a mix.
Green energy remains entirely sensible.
But I'm with you that "no growth" is bonkers in a Green worldview, because we are continually cutting the Energy and Emissions Density of our GDP.
And the drugs policies, which have been savagely attacked have a possible logic if explored, and unwrapped from the rhetoric. The similar policies in Portugal over several decades seem to be effective.
I'm interested that the other parties have gone quiet on Hypno Boobjob.
No growth isn't entirely bonkers, particularly in a world run by AI. If it means we can all work three day weeks and generally have more fun then that's brilliant for human welfare, but potentially neutral for GDP.
Estimates vary but a large proportion of productivity growth in the 20th century was transferred to weekends, 9 to 5 etc etc. In theory that proportion should grow.
Don't forget the extended pre-adulthood and retirement.
Yes, just looking at the stats again, in parts of Europe around 50% went on increased leisure, while in the US it's much smaller (and explains why their economy grew so much faster). But European indices of welfare are often much higher than the US as a result. I think it's important to remember that while GDP per capita often correlates with improved standards of living, correlation != causation. I'd suggest that the underlying productivity growth is what is important.
It also explains why flooding the country with immigrants to prop up a post-Brexit economy was, let's say, sub-optimal for people in the UK having a good time. It almost certainly helped boost GDP per capita, because only 50% of the extant population are in work, but that doesn't mean anything if people's living standards don't improve.
TLDR "no-growth" is not insane as long as it is paired with productivity growth.
What should worry Labour most is that Hannah Spencer looks a lot like what the Median Labour voter used to be: Young, female, aspirational, motivated, compassionate and comfortable with different cultures.
Problem is the loony policies.
They are a mix.
Green energy remains entirely sensible.
But I'm with you that "no growth" is bonkers in a Green worldview, because we are continually cutting the Energy and Emissions Density of our GDP.
And the drugs policies, which have been savagely attacked have a possible logic if explored, and unwrapped from the rhetoric. The similar policies in Portugal over several decades seem to be effective.
I'm interested that the other parties have gone quiet on Hypno Boobjob.
No growth isn't entirely bonkers, particularly in a world run by AI. If it means we can all work three day weeks and generally have more fun then that's brilliant for human welfare, but potentially neutral for GDP.
Estimates vary but a large proportion of productivity growth in the 20th century was transferred to weekends, 9 to 5 etc etc. In theory that proportion should grow.
Don't forget the extended pre-adulthood and retirement.
Yes, just looking at the stats again, in parts of Europe around 50% went on increased leisure, while in the US it's much smaller (and explains why their economy grew so much faster). But European indices of welfare are often much higher than the US as a result. I think it's important to remember that while GDP per capita often correlates with improved standards of living, correlation != causation. I'd suggest that the underlying productivity growth is what is important.
It also explains why flooding the country with immigrants to prop up a post-Brexit economy was, let's say, sub-optimal for people in the UK having a good time. It almost certainly helped boost GDP per capita, because only 50% of the extant population are in work, but that doesn't mean anything if people's living standards don't improve.
TLDR "no-growth" is not insane as long as it is paired with productivity growth.
While the faith in Kemi can grow Starmer is already failing to adapt to a new landscape.
I wonder how well a small c - green arrangement would work?
I’ve been a member of the Conservative Environment Network since its inception and they have people that we would work with. They are definitely better than Labour on a lot of issues.
Interesting times
That would make me vote Reform. If the Tories get into bed with the new islamist party then they're finished for good.
We ain’t Islamist. But not global majority averse.
The global majority is not Muslim...
Yep. And not Islamist.
The Greens I’m familiar with ( I can’t say I know the Your Party / Labour new arrivals particularly well ) are quite globally inclusive.
Much of the acceptance of socialism as a solution is a response to the way neoliberalism / inequality is fucking over the planet.
Stop with the pollution and despoliation and we are much more likely to be your friends.
There is also no doubt that the fossil fuel industry enables authoritarian regimes, where social justice is a victim exactly as the biosphere is a victim.
Religions and stuff, generally an issue when their Abrahamic mindset claims ownership and domination. Otherwise not.
Why would anyone care if your beliefs are irrational but your behaviour is respectful of planetary boundaries?
There’s a lot of knee jerk hate floating about. I reckon people need to chill.
He'd be a great choice, since even if he leads the party to a recovery he's losing his seat next time anyway, so you don't have to worry about him overstaying his welcome.
Probably last chance saloon for the right of Labour. If not Wes we have 3 years of comedy socialism ahead
Let's see some comedy socialism before the headline act in 2029.
Google "Khorasan" (a putative greater Afghanistan) or "Pashtunistan" (a smaller version) Google "Durand Line" (a border Afghanistan no longer recognises)
Afghanistan has two factions: the Taliban (in charge) and another (even more extreme). The problem is Khorasan/Greater Afghanistan and the relations with Pakistan. Afghanistan wants to be bigger and the tension is how does it do that. This has been building for some years and about two years ago the Taliban was seen as the moderate partner (!), but recently tensions have built again and I think the Durand Line is no longer recognised.
For those who like dark humour, the Taliban were created (mostly) by the ISI (Pakistani Military Intelligence).
They were worried that the post Soviet Afghan government (Mostly the US backed Northern Alliance types) was getting too friendly with India. Do they sponsored a rebel movement….
ISI has used (or tried to use) weaponised Islamicism many times. The attack on Mumbai was carried out by one of their pet creations - who were either given the go ahead by a faction in the ISI or got off the leash on their own.
Despite this biting them (repeatedly) they keep on trying it.
He'd be a great choice, since even if he leads the party to a recovery he's losing his seat next time anyway, so you don't have to worry about him overstaying his welcome.
Probably last chance saloon for the right of Labour. If not Wes we have 3 years of comedy socialism ahead
Let's see some comedy socialism before the headline act in 2029.
He'd be a great choice, since even if he leads the party to a recovery he's losing his seat next time anyway, so you don't have to worry about him overstaying his welcome.
Probably last chance saloon for the right of Labour. If not Wes we have 3 years of comedy socialism ahead
Rayner or Cooper would probably be pragmatic enough to steer a vaguely sensible course. EdM very much not so - I think he's a closet megalomaniac. (I don't think he used to be that way, but I'm pretty sure he is now)
The other driftwood is very hard to assess. Lammy for example would just steer the ship with the winds. Nothing good would happen and nothing bad, unless there was an iceberg. And icebergs have a nasty way of arriving, unexpected, at your front door. They turn up like Greens at my address. (Never seen either)
He'd be a great choice, since even if he leads the party to a recovery he's losing his seat next time anyway, so you don't have to worry about him overstaying his welcome.
Probably last chance saloon for the right of Labour. If not Wes we have 3 years of comedy socialism ahead
Let's see some comedy socialism before the headline act in 2029.
#thereisonlyonezackpolanski
#thankgodtheresonlyone
Glastonbury must be relieved they are having a year of as Zack Polanski doesn’t scan with Seven Nation Army like Jeremy Corbyn did so they have a year to find a tune.
Our weapons procurement budget has actually fallen. Whether or not this particular decision os justified, it is one of the consequences of that.
Thousands of jobs at Leonardo's Yeovil helicopter factory feared to be at risk after Treasury officials this morning refused to sign off £1bn medium helicopters deal.
Source familiar with the discussions says: "It's over."
I was right to be a bit wary of the Telegraph story; according to the Beeb, the Telegraph has it 100% the wrong way round. So order approved by Reeves, overruling the MoD.
If confirmed, that's the last time I repost anything from the Telegraph. It used to be a genuine newspaper.
I think it happened like this:
Treasury: have you finished your defence spending plan?
Mod: no
T: then you can’t have any new toys until you’ve eaten your greens
M: but Rachel!
T: no
Unite: what the bloody hell are you playing at?
T: ok then
Thank f--- for that, but this is no way to run military procurement.
Comments
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2026/02/26/vance-no-chance-us-will-be-drawn-out-war-middle-east/
Angry with Reform
Angry with the Greens
Angry with Kemi
Angry with Ed
Angry with the SNP
It is not a good look and he doesn't seem to know what to do
Maybe he should look in the mirror and take responsibility
Currently you have to lay £6.40 to win £1 so not a great return for a bet unlikely to be resolved for 3 years.
https://x.com/BillClinton/status/2027424128559452573
I know what I saw, and more importantly, what I didn't see.
I know what I did, and more importantly, what I didn't do.
I saw nothing, and I did nothing wrong.
You see this with a lot of Soviet projects. Strangely cancelled, even though it was all world beating and perfect. See Lun and GNOM for other examples.
You can argue that their manifesto commitments are expensive but there are not many that aren't mainstream
Part of Starmer's problem is that, as well as having poor political antennae, he's old.
Childhood in the 60s and 70s, a student and starting his career in the 80s. That has to affect his mental map of right, wrong and the big questions facing the country.
We rightly point and laugh at Reformers and Brexit buccaneers for wanting to turn the clock back to an imagined 1950s idyll. And whilst I'm comfortable saying that Starmer's worldview is more benign than Farage's or Lowe's, it's almost as dated.
Not sure it's a culpable thing; it's not easy to think of a politician who has stayed current as the world has evolved. But it's one of nature's ways of hinting that it's time to leave the stage.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SOyFPkMqx98
The one thing most Labour people want to see more from him is anger.
He's way too nice and placid.
Which is a surprisingly generous 15% return.
They are currently shorter than both Cons and LDs.
Could those people on Restore Britain not find a charity bucket?
The problem is that the Greens' diagnosis of the problem ("billionaires") and preferred solution (tax the rich more) won't work, just as Reform's diagnosis ("foreigners") and solution (kick out the foreigners) won't work either. I can't pretend there are any easy answers or painless remedies but I do know that populism of either left or right variety will only make things worse. At the same time I can understand why voters are searching for different solutions.
https://www.anthropic.com/news/statement-department-of-war
"The Department of War has stated they will only contract with AI companies who accede to “any lawful use” and remove safeguards in the cases mentioned above. They have threatened to remove us from their systems if we maintain these safeguards; they have also threatened to designate us a “supply chain risk”—a label reserved for US adversaries, never before applied to an American company—and to invoke the Defense Production Act to force the safeguards’ removal. These latter two threats are inherently contradictory: one labels us a security risk; the other labels Claude as essential to national security.
Regardless, these threats do not change our position: we cannot in good conscience accede to their request."
I admit I had expected them just to give in under protest.
Stony silence.
She's toast in May.
Just can't wait for the hissy fit and tantrums.
She's never ever been wrong you know.
It really isn't too much of a surprise that they struggle to engage with the under 40's.
And the fact that they seem comfortable with ascribing a Green victory to Islamism and sectarianism doesn't suggest they are willing to try.
Fact is. The Greens lead with voters under 65.
Describing them all as loons is basket of deplorables level of political strategy.
And they are the only people currently voting for the legacy Parties.
Dale was suggesting she was promoting a culture of potential violence against MPs and her reply was to the effect of "so what? Labour started it".
* Thank goodness? I'd give her a shot at greatness. It might work, it might go wrong.
Clearly future generations are in voters minds based on IHT being a tricky balance. Call their bluff - do you want your grandchildren growing up where crack is available from the chemist or we are rounding up foreigners like ICE (I exaggerate for effect).
I want to see some bravery in politics. There is enough time to the next GE to spell out the truth and reason with voters. If this is impossible then the UK is fucked anyway so may as well keep circling the plug hole.
(I think they have been doing it for ages.)
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgkg4zr33lo
"Hen party ruined after bride-to-be breaks woman's nose in ugly Newcastle brawl"
(There's an age cutoff somewhere. Not totally binary, but pretty sharp. It separates people for who all these social questions are undead debates from those who are frankly baffled that anyone can question the rightness of social reform.)
Green energy remains entirely sensible.
But I'm with you that "no growth" is bonkers in a Green worldview, because we are continually cutting the Energy and Emissions Density of our GDP.
And the drugs policies, which have been savagely attacked have a possible logic if explored, and unwrapped from the rhetoric. The similar policies in Portugal over several decades seem to be effective.
I'm interested that the other parties have gone quiet on Hypno Boobjob.
https://bsky.app/profile/peterstefanovic.bsky.social/post/3mftzr5dedk2b
The lines from PM and Cabinet today essentially labelling the Green Party as extremist is appalling, desperate and frankly embarrassing. It also makes very clear that the leadership has zero understanding of where it has been going wrong.
The party is being destroyed & an urgent change of direction is needed.
People are allowed to be dicks.
CPS loses bid to overturn Quran-burner's acquittal
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cvgv785n23eo
Trump: "We could very well end up having a friendly takeover of Cuba."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cdjmrxkwk3mo
Beating on Labour voters and then expecting them to come rushing back at the next GE is delusional.
Estimates vary but a large proportion of productivity growth in the 20th century was transferred to weekends, 9 to 5 etc etc. In theory that proportion should grow.
Engage gob
Engage brain oops can't find one
God forbid any MP of any Party gets attacked. They will play that clip back over and over.
She'll be rightly blamed for it.
I doubt she would worry about that either.
I think Labour have been out of power for so long they have forgotten that when in power they have to tell us about the positive things they do. Oh and that is easier if you actually do some stuff too.
Thanks for the cooking tips from various posters. Perhaps I could integrate sandalwood into tonight's lentils and chicken somehow, to complete the ecological theme.
Ian Byrne is on the Long-Bailey/Burgon wing of the party.
Beautiful Georgian architecture in Granger Town.
Google "Durand Line" (a border Afghanistan no longer recognises)
Afghanistan has two factions: the Taliban (in charge) and another (even more extreme). The problem is Khorasan/Greater Afghanistan and the relations with Pakistan. Afghanistan wants to be bigger and the tension is how does it do that. This has been building for some years and about two years ago the Taliban was seen as the moderate partner (!), but recently tensions have built again and I think the Durand Line is no longer recognised.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuhP9I3DsRE
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hj-ESvUlYI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8dwDYXXqVQ
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Durand_Line
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khorasan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pashtunistan
Great news as an extra £1.8bn over 3 years diverted to the 95% who attend State Schools.
Now abolish the fake Charity cons many set up.
Parasites.
In my early career the office would be busy until sometime between 6.30 and 7. Nowadays by 6 it’s already emptying out.
It also explains why flooding the country with immigrants to prop up a post-Brexit economy was, let's say, sub-optimal for people in the UK having a good time. It almost certainly helped boost GDP per capita, because only 50% of the extant population are in work, but that doesn't mean anything if people's living standards don't improve.
TLDR "no-growth" is not insane as long as it is paired with productivity growth.
The Greens I’m familiar with ( I can’t say I know the Your Party / Labour new arrivals particularly well ) are quite globally inclusive.
Much of the acceptance of socialism as a solution is a response to the way neoliberalism / inequality is fucking over the planet.
Stop with the pollution and despoliation and we are much more likely to be your friends.
There is also no doubt that the fossil fuel industry enables authoritarian regimes, where social justice is a victim exactly as the biosphere is a victim.
Religions and stuff, generally an issue when their Abrahamic mindset claims ownership and domination. Otherwise not.
Why would anyone care if your beliefs are irrational but your behaviour is respectful of planetary boundaries?
There’s a lot of knee jerk hate floating about.
I reckon people need to chill.
#thereisonlyonezackpolanski
They were worried that the post Soviet Afghan government (Mostly the US backed Northern Alliance types) was getting too friendly with India. Do they sponsored a rebel movement….
ISI has used (or tried to use) weaponised Islamicism many times. The attack on Mumbai was carried out by one of their pet creations - who were either given the go ahead by a faction in the ISI or got off the leash on their own.
Despite this biting them (repeatedly) they keep on trying it.
The other driftwood is very hard to assess. Lammy for example would just steer the ship with the winds. Nothing good would happen and nothing bad, unless there was an iceberg. And icebergs have a nasty way of arriving, unexpected, at your front door. They turn up like Greens at my address. (Never seen either)