PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
I know several who are close friends and, if he really is one (which I doubt), he is entirely unrepresentative.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
The minor flaw in that argument is that it was a complete waste of time and effort.
From the header,
The reporting is quite balanced: about 8/10 Labour voters would rejoin, including pluralities in all the Leave-voting constituencies. But there is reluctance to reopen divisive debates. (This could be a brake on Labour rejoiners - though exhaustion also a brake on Reform in places like Makerfield)
In other words, Brexit is a ghastly heirloom that we're stuck with for fear of a family argument leading to the rewriting of someone's will. As I may have said before.
Then the questions become:
Is there a threshold where the pushback on joining doesn't have to be feared?
If so, what is that threshold?
If so, will passive factors cause that threshold to be reached?
The trouble is that the Miliband brothers are a bit weird and really struggle with photographs of them with food.
That banana. God.
The other trouble is the 'change' they want to see is actually deeply damaging and won't help a single person. David Milliband is currently doing to our energy provision and by extension to our economy what he did to that bacon sandwich - agonisingly ripping it apart sinew by sinew.
I think we need a ban on the word 'change' in politics. 'Change' is a totally meaningless concept. People did not 'vote for change' - a 'change' could be death squads hunting down morris dancers. People didn't vote for that. Anyone who cannot articulate pithily what specific 'change' they feel people voted for and how they plan to deliver that specific 'change' should be treated with deep mistrust. It is especially concerning when they team this unknown 'change' with 'further and faster', which means not only are they asking for a blank cheque, they're also going to take that blank cheque and introduce radical and probably unwelcome change because 'this is what people wanted'.
1st para nonsense. 2nd para spot on.
I'm still trying to imagine David Milliband eating a bacon sandwich..😏
I vote that the Labour Leadership should be chosen by a bacon sandwich eating contest
Someone would argue that’s Islamophobia and anti-vegan
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
They don't care. It's pure signal. "We are on the side of grafters". They'll hope the details aren't particularly critiqued by the target audience.
It's not a Government-in-waiting policy. Like the migrant processing centres, it's a very oppositional 'we will never have to govern' policy.
I seem to remember Sarkozy proposed something similar to make work pay.
The reform had no significant impact at all on the number of hours worked. It did, however, result in an increase in the overtime declared by skilled employees seeking to maximize the tax benefits it offered without actually working more hours.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Because they get to (re)define absolutely everything these days.
'Genocide' where the target population actually increases in size? Sure, no problem!
'Far right' based on how much one wants to emulate the immigration policies of the GDR, NK etc. Yeah, why not, it's about how it *feels* to say the words....
And so on. Throw in a few disingenuous strawmen about the influence of the 'right wing media' (which hasn't been influential in ages and isn't really right wing) and you're sorted!
We really are in Orwellian times where the Authoritarian Left get to call the shots and get to change the definitions to make it ok.
Accidental Chinese intelligence asset Reid has resurfaced, on a topic that is gripping the nation (well, a tiny percentage of it). I wonder what the women-only spaces situation is on HM submarines?
Joani Reid MP @JoaniReid · 22 May The law is clear. Women-only spaces must mean women-only spaces.
John Swinney should stop hiding behind process and implement the EHRC guidance across Scotland’s public sector.
Women and girls should not have to wait for the SNP to find the courage to accept reality.
Anyway, my prediction for the great relegation battle. West Ham will beat Leeds, but Spurs will save themselves by securing a 1-1 draw with a streaky equaliser in the last 10. Noting here, Everton's recent propensity for conceding late goals, a propensity they share with Boro (sob ...)
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Like many words the exact meaning is a matter of dispute.
The meaning has been deliberately distorted. Not least by a global superpower the Soviet Union that deliberately sought to rebrand antisemitism as antizionism and create a wedge between the USA and countries of the middle east.
Prior to 7 October I would never have called myself a zionist. Now I would unequivocally say that I am.
Front door looking VERY smart! Deep gloss in a dark royal blue.
Just shows up everything I haven't done yet - so no images!
Rejoin is a vast mountain range of wanky hopium - until such point as the French and German economies are running way ahead of that of the UK and there can be no doubt it is solely down to being in the EU. That is an age away - certainly at current growth rates, the membership fees could not remotely be justified.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
The minor flaw in that argument is that it was a complete waste of time and effort.
From the header,
The reporting is quite balanced: about 8/10 Labour voters would rejoin, including pluralities in all the Leave-voting constituencies. But there is reluctance to reopen divisive debates. (This could be a brake on Labour rejoiners - though exhaustion also a brake on Reform in places like Makerfield)
In other words, Brexit is a ghastly heirloom that we're stuck with for fear of a family argument leading to the rewriting of someone's will. As I may have said before.
Then the questions become:
Is there a threshold where the pushback on joining doesn't have to be feared?
If so, what is that threshold?
If so, will passive factors cause that threshold to be reached?
If so, when?
If so, what do we all do in the meantime?
Other questions:
Brexit has been unpopular because its implementation is associated with some disastrous policies on immigration, and a general feeling of drift, malaise, and decline. What's the expiry date on this equation?
Is it feasible as time passes to continue to blame the country's many problems on some barriers to trade that came in in 2019?
How can a Government perform well and still leave room for 'everything being shit due to Brexit'?
Is is not inevitable that any Government that wants to govern well run into retained EU legislation, or things like the ECHR, and want to alter these laws to prevent bat tunnels, theme parks being stopped due to jumping spiders, and the other EU-origin absurdities making Britain ungovernable and uneconomical?
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Like many words the exact meaning is a matter of dispute.
The meaning has been deliberately distorted. Not least by a global superpower the Soviet Union that deliberately sought to rebrand antisemitism as antizionism and create a wedge between the USA and countries of the middle east.
Prior to 7 October I would never have called myself a zionist. Now I would unequivocally say that I am.
22 Arab States = 13,000,000 sq. km. in area (roughly 3/4 the size of Russia) Israel = 22,000 sq. km. in area (roughly the size of Wales)
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Like many words the exact meaning is a matter of dispute.
The meaning has been deliberately distorted. Not least by a global superpower the Soviet Union that deliberately sought to rebrand antisemitism as antizionism and create a wedge between the USA and countries of the middle east.
Prior to 7 October I would never have called myself a zionist. Now I would unequivocally say that I am.
22 Arab States = 13,000,000 sq. km. in area (roughly 3/4 the size of Russia) Israel = 22,000 sq. km. in area (roughly the size of Wales)
13,000,000 sq. km from which it was generally considered necessary to get rid of the Jews.
I am fascinated by these lurid assertions of electoral fraud in a certain ward in a certain person's Constituency.
Now it can't be exactly as Talk Radio are reporting it so I wonder what we do know.
There are two candidates which were allegedly fraudulent. Really ? Well, in the abstract for both candidates someone would have had to have filled in Nomination Papers, fact. On the main form there would be the candidate's name, address and his electoral number on the current register (if they are on that register). There would then be the tick box as to how that candidate could lawfully seek election. Then there would have to be a proposer and a seconder. Finally someone has to sign that form, usually the agent or in default of an agent the person acting as the agent.
Next, in the abstract there would have to be the form when the nominee consented to being a candidate. This they have to sign in the presence of a credible witness or maybe two. Usually that would be the person acting as agent.
I am unclear as to what the assertion is being made. If the people did not exist then they couldn't be on the Electoral Roll and so couldn't have an Electoral Number so in turn they could not have passed vetting of the main nomination paper, fact. (Except for the business, property qualification)
So, they would have to be real people. The assertion might be that they knew nothing about their "nomination" in which case they could not have signed the consent to nomination. In that case the "agent" and all the witnesses have committed an offence. The proposer and seconder might have acted lawfully genuinely believing the nomination was proper and had the informed consent of the "candidate".
I still find this hard to believe. Another scenario is that the people were real and were persuaded to stand as paper candidates "Independents". It could be asserted there was nothing wrong with this and that is what will no doubt be asserted. However, if the candidates were not credible candidates and were described as "Independents" when they were not then the descriptions of themselves would be false and fall foul of the "Literal Democrats" description - they were candidates put in place to deceive fair minded electors. My guess is this is most likely to be the reality.
Anyway, if any of this is true and I hope it is not, then that is Electoral Fraud, Undue Election, one heck of a fine and disqualification from standing for election for 5 or 10 years. I am glad it didn't happen in my kitchen.
What do we really know, in the abstract ?
I remember in the Eighties the Trots in North Lambeth would go round spotting boarded up flats (plenty) and go to the polling station pretending to be the elector registered at that address. Given this, it would be easy enough for three of more bad actors to work their way through Mr Cumbria's check list. The only contact with authority would be handing in their papers to the Town Hall where electoral services staff hard pressed during the election period are not going to query forms which, on the face of, it tick all the boxes.
I take your point, but there is the world of difference between that, personation on election day and the creation of a fake candidate. There is an Election Handbook which Electoral Staff have to follow upon receiving a completed Nomination Pack. It is painting by numbers. When they have gone through it they must issue a ruling in writing, to the candidate, as to whether the papers represent a valid nomination.
I do not for a second think the Electoral Staff would do anything untoward, and I'm not being sarcastic when I say that.
If I am wrong about that then a lot of people are going to be sharing the same cell. That would be serious stuff, certainly the ARO, Acting Returning Officer would and must be sacked AND removed from any accrued pension rights as per a bent copper. I cannot believe that could happen even in Tower Hamlets.
No, the forms would have been filled out in a way which gave the impression the candidates existed, were lawfully entitled to stand, were willing to stand and if they were described as "independent" were independent.
I wish I could be as sanguine about the police handling of this complaint. I have seen at least three occasion where a credible case of electoral fraud was sidelined by the police in such a way as to overshoot the deadline, 6 months. When I walk into 10 Downing Street, those police will wish I hadn't.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
You're ignoring the fact that a lot of people want it to cease to exist.
The trouble is that the Miliband brothers are a bit weird and really struggle with photographs of them with food.
That banana. God.
The other trouble is the 'change' they want to see is actually deeply damaging and won't help a single person. David Milliband is currently doing to our energy provision and by extension to our economy what he did to that bacon sandwich - agonisingly ripping it apart sinew by sinew.
I think we need a ban on the word 'change' in politics. 'Change' is a totally meaningless concept. People did not 'vote for change' - a 'change' could be death squads hunting down morris dancers. People didn't vote for that. Anyone who cannot articulate pithily what specific 'change' they feel people voted for and how they plan to deliver that specific 'change' should be treated with deep mistrust. It is especially concerning when they team this unknown 'change' with 'further and faster', which means not only are they asking for a blank cheque, they're also going to take that blank cheque and introduce radical and probably unwelcome change because 'this is what people wanted'.
1st para nonsense. 2nd para spot on.
I'm still trying to imagine David Milliband eating a bacon sandwich..😏
I vote that the Labour Leadership should be chosen by a bacon sandwich eating contest
Someone would argue that’s Islamophobia and anti-vegan
Report in the Sunday Times that some civil service unions might refuse to cooperate with an incoming Reform government.
Having to anticipate things like this will mean an incoming Reform government will be much more prepared than usual. Farage will need a plan to deal with the enemy within.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
I've pointed out before, that what is meant by Zionism was deeply contested right from the start.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
You're ignoring the fact that a lot of people want it to cease to exist.
I know there are. I'm just explaining what 'Zionism' means these days if it's to retain value.
But if you want to describe everybody in the world who does not wish to see Israel destroyed as Zionists, ok you stick with that.
I'm a Zionist then, by that metric, despite being pro Palestinian on most of the salient contentious issues pertaining to the conflict.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
I've pointed out before, that what is meant by Zionism was deeply contested right from the start.
Report in the Sunday Times that some civil service unions might refuse to cooperate with an incoming Reform government.
I'm not Reform, but this yanks my chain.
The voters are in charge. If they elect a Reform government you bloody well jump to it, same as Green, Labour, LD, Conservative, YourParty or anyone else.
Anyway, my prediction for the great relegation battle. West Ham will beat Leeds, but Spurs will save themselves by securing a 1-1 draw with a streaky equaliser in the last 10. Noting here, Everton's recent propensity for conceding late goals, a propensity they share with Boro (sob ...)
You been spying on their secret plan?
In the two relevant games, Spurs v Everton, West Ham v Leeds there are nine possible combinations of outcome. Of these 8 result in Spurs staying up, and only one results in Spurs' relegation. Bet accordingly.
I shall carry on hoping Spurs go down, but the odds are not favourable.
Report in the Sunday Times that some civil service unions might refuse to cooperate with an incoming Reform government.
I'm not Reform, but this yanks my chain.
The voters are in charge. If they elect a Reform government you bloody well jump to it, same as Green, Labour, LD, Conservative, YourParty or anyone else.
Now be fair. A government that didn't have to put up with the idiocy of the DfT, DfE or DoH would probably be a much better government than one that did.
The tiny drawback is that we're talking Reform here, who are a bunch of grifting swivel-eyed loons even less fit to manage a government role than Amanda Spielman.
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
Report in the Sunday Times that some civil service unions might refuse to cooperate with an incoming Reform government.
I'm not Reform, but this yanks my chain.
The voters are in charge. If they elect a Reform government you bloody well jump to it, same as Green, Labour, LD, Conservative, YourParty or anyone else.
Now be fair. A government that didn't have to put up with the idiocy of the DfT, DfE or DoH would probably be a much better government than one that did.
The tiny drawback is that we're talking Reform here, who are a bunch of grifting swivel-eyed loons even less fit to manage a government role than Amanda Spielman.
That's being generous - I can easily see Farage accidently privatising the NHS because someone talked about giving him a gift of a few $m...
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
Further to your analogy a lot of people (including me) think that once Scotland becomes independent that the SNP will cease to exist, though there may be a vaguely centre left successor party with a different name. With Israel, once the state came into being Zionism mutated into a super bug that infected the whole body politic.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
Further to your analogy a lot of people (including me) think that once Scotland becomes independent that the SNP will cease to exist, though there may be a vaguely centre left successor party with a different name. With Israel, once the state came into being Zionism mutated into a super bug that infected the whole body politic.
Report in the Sunday Times that some civil service unions might refuse to cooperate with an incoming Reform government.
I'm not Reform, but this yanks my chain.
The voters are in charge. If they elect a Reform government you bloody well jump to it, same as Green, Labour, LD, Conservative, YourParty or anyone else.
I think it would be a mistake. The ability of the British State to capture political movements, and moderate them, is a defining feature! Look at the Labour Party, or even the SNP cohort in Westminster. Wasn't one of them looking for a seat in the Lords recently? If Reform are denied their proper place, victory would make them even angrier than it normally does.
Civil Servants are obviously free to resign if they don't want to, or feel they are unable to, implement the policies of a Reform Government.
Report in the Sunday Times that some civil service unions might refuse to cooperate with an incoming Reform government.
Well, why should Reform be different from any other party? Our civil service are increasingly making our political class a decorative part of the constitution.
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
I agree on your first point but I'm not at all sure about the second. Lots of judges are not very good including quite a few who seem to have a fairly sketchy understanding of laws and legal procedures. And those judges - particularly this judge - need to be disciplined properly and removed, if only because his actions have actually undermined the rule of law by effectively saying rape and child pornography are not worthy of punishment - regardless of what he said, that sends a message they are not serious crimes and such is not the case.
But unless more is revealed by that process I wouldn't go so far as a criminal investigation. Leaving aside the fact that it's not a crime to be a stupid twat, I can think of all sorts of ways a dodgy government could exploit that to undermine the court system and with all its faults that would not be a good thing.
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
Has the full judgment been published? My quick search has failed to find it. There are powers to appeal it, and the sensible thing is to wait and see if the a-g thinks there are grounds, and then wait and see if the Court of Appeal alters the sentence, and makes seriously adverse comments about the judgment and the judge.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
Further to your analogy a lot of people (including me) think that once Scotland becomes independent that the SNP will cease to exist, though there may be a vaguely centre left successor party with a different name. With Israel, once the state came into being Zionism mutated into a super bug that infected the whole body politic.
Would you say the same about the ANC?
Sinn Fein would be the interesting one. A case could be made that it has formed every government in Ireland since the Executive Council was first formed in 1922, but I don't think the current group calling itself Sinn Fein would agree with that.
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
Have the ages of the guilty parties been revealed? I presume they were under 18 at the time of the offence. Have they been held in custody to this point?
Ken Clarke got a lot of grief for saying some rapes are worse than others. Does premeditation have an impact in rape sentencing the same way it would with murder? This was obviously a carefully planned crime which surely makes it worse. And before blaming the judge one has to look at the sentencing guidelines. Has he actually gone against those. Hardly his fault if he's merely following government instruction.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
Further to your analogy a lot of people (including me) think that once Scotland becomes independent that the SNP will cease to exist, though there may be a vaguely centre left successor party with a different name. With Israel, once the state came into being Zionism mutated into a super bug that infected the whole body politic.
Would you say the same about the ANC?
Direct comparisons are invidious, so no, not really. Would you?
"After two years of strong post-pandemic recovery, California’s population dipped last year, new state estimates show.
The decline was marginal — roughly 54,000 people from January 2025 to January 2026, putting the state population at just under 39.6 million — but still notable for a state whose population had only recently bounced back from the pandemic."
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
I don't think points 1 and 3 are things that couldn't be ironed out. It is already the case with benefits that things get averaged out. Same as the most low brow suggestion of what if people charged a £1000 / hr for overtime, again that is pretty easy to combat.
But there are so many other major issues its not a serious policy, its an election stunt, that will be get kicked into the long grass in a few months.
I can't see any way around people conspiring with their employers to fudge their nominal wages and hours, short of government mandated clocking in machines. If I'm employing someone for £18/hr for an actual 36hrs, and reporting it as minimum wage for 36hrs plus a pile of overtime they will pay a lot less tax under this policy.
Lots of better ways to fix the tax system than this.
The low hanging fruit for a Reform right wing is higher tax free threshold with reduced in work benefits, remove cliff edges at £60k and £100...and if you want to be really radical things like combining NI and IC. However, all of this requires some serious hard work and careful thinking to get right (there will be winner and losers however you do it).
A suspect somebody at Reform has looked and said loads of people in Makersfield work shifts / paid per hour type jobs, this is a way we can show loads of leg of your taxes are too high, here is a freebie.
Plus its also a Trump tax gimmick - Reform's default source of policy ideas.
Whereas, as you say, the actually useful policies require careful thinking, hard work and proper planning.
The likes of Thatcher, Howe and Tebbit were willing to do that.
The moves are related to Vice President JD Vance's anti-fraud task force, which has been accelerating its messaging before the November elections. The panel set up by Republican President Donald Trump seeks to crack down on potential misuse of public money.
The most significant step Wednesday came from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services with a nationwide six-month moratorium on all new Medicare enrolments by providers of hospice and home care...
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
Have the ages of the guilty parties been revealed? I presume they were under 18 at the time of the offence. Have they been held in custody to this point?
Ken Clarke got a lot of grief for saying some rapes are worse than others. Does premeditation have an impact in rape sentencing the same way it would with murder? This was obviously a carefully planned crime which surely makes it worse. And before blaming the judge one has to look at the sentencing guidelines. Has he actually gone against those. Hardly his fault if he's merely following government instruction.
In theory you could look at those and talk about community orders.
However, given that this involved grooming, the creation of child pornography and the sharing of child pornography that should as made clear below actually have elevated it to custodial level.
One thing that I think will get him into trouble is he said he 'didn't want to make them into criminals.' Well, newsflash, they had already made themselves into highly dangerous criminals, so that ship had sailed. What I think he meant was that sending them to prison would launch them on a further life of crime when they came out which may be true but sometimes is unavoidable.
I am fascinated by these lurid assertions of electoral fraud in a certain ward in a certain person's Constituency.
Now it can't be exactly as Talk Radio are reporting it so I wonder what we do know.
There are two candidates which were allegedly fraudulent. Really ? Well, in the abstract for both candidates someone would have had to have filled in Nomination Papers, fact. On the main form there would be the candidate's name, address and his electoral number on the current register (if they are on that register). There would then be the tick box as to how that candidate could lawfully seek election. Then there would have to be a proposer and a seconder. Finally someone has to sign that form, usually the agent or in default of an agent the person acting as the agent.
Next, in the abstract there would have to be the form when the nominee consented to being a candidate. This they have to sign in the presence of a credible witness or maybe two. Usually that would be the person acting as agent.
I am unclear as to what the assertion is being made. If the people did not exist then they couldn't be on the Electoral Roll and so couldn't have an Electoral Number so in turn they could not have passed vetting of the main nomination paper, fact. (Except for the business, property qualification)
So, they would have to be real people. The assertion might be that they knew nothing about their "nomination" in which case they could not have signed the consent to nomination. In that case the "agent" and all the witnesses have committed an offence. The proposer and seconder might have acted lawfully genuinely believing the nomination was proper and had the informed consent of the "candidate".
I still find this hard to believe. Another scenario is that the people were real and were persuaded to stand as paper candidates "Independents". It could be asserted there was nothing wrong with this and that is what will no doubt be asserted. However, if the candidates were not credible candidates and were described as "Independents" when they were not then the descriptions of themselves would be false and fall foul of the "Literal Democrats" description - they were candidates put in place to deceive fair minded electors. My guess is this is most likely to be the reality.
Anyway, if any of this is true and I hope it is not, then that is Electoral Fraud, Undue Election, one heck of a fine and disqualification from standing for election for 5 or 10 years. I am glad it didn't happen in my kitchen.
What do we really know, in the abstract ?
I remember in the Eighties the Trots in North Lambeth would go round spotting boarded up flats (plenty) and go to the polling station pretending to be the elector registered at that address. Given this, it would be easy enough for three of more bad actors to work their way through Mr Cumbria's check list. The only contact with authority would be handing in their papers to the Town Hall where electoral services staff hard pressed during the election period are not going to query forms which, on the face of, it tick all the boxes.
I take your point, but there is the world of difference between that, personation on election day and the creation of a fake candidate. There is an Election Handbook which Electoral Staff have to follow upon receiving a completed Nomination Pack. It is painting by numbers. When they have gone through it they must issue a ruling in writing, to the candidate, as to whether the papers represent a valid nomination.
I do not for a second think the Electoral Staff would do anything untoward, and I'm not being sarcastic when I say that.
If I am wrong about that then a lot of people are going to be sharing the same cell. That would be serious stuff, certainly the ARO, Acting Returning Officer would and must be sacked AND removed from any accrued pension rights as per a bent copper. I cannot believe that could happen even in Tower Hamlets.
No, the forms would have been filled out in a way which gave the impression the candidates existed, were lawfully entitled to stand, were willing to stand and if they were described as "independent" were independent.
I wish I could be as sanguine about the police handling of this complaint. I have seen at least three occasion where a credible case of electoral fraud was sidelined by the police in such a way as to overshoot the deadline, 6 months. When I walk into 10 Downing Street, those police will wish I hadn't.
I've not been following the saga particularly closely, but I got the impression that some individuals appear to have somehow got onto the ballot paper as independent candidates without their knowledge - i.e. they are real living people who could have ligitimately stood for election, but on whose behalf persons unknown appear to falsely submitted fraudulent nomination papers.
The really exciting accusation (although vehemently denied) is that said persons unknown are accused of organising this conspiracy at a breakfast meeting at the house of one Angela Rayner.
The accusations are rather curiously specific, and I very much hope are investigated properly, and in such a manner that charges can be brought against anyone guilty of wrongdoing. Sadly, prior attempts (or more precisely, prior failure) to investigate what has in the past appeared to be rather more blatant electoral fraud (cough, Tower Hamlets, cough) hold out little hope on this point.
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
I agree on your first point but I'm not at all sure about the second. Lots of judges are not very good including quite a few who seem to have a fairly sketchy understanding of laws and legal procedures. And those judges - particularly this judge - need to be disciplined properly and removed, if only because his actions have actually undermined the rule of law by effectively saying rape and child pornography are not worthy of punishment - regardless of what he said, that sends a message they are not serious crimes and such is not the case.
But unless more is revealed by that process I wouldn't go so far as a criminal investigation. Leaving aside the fact that it's not a crime to be a stupid twat, I can think of all sorts of ways a dodgy government could exploit that to undermine the court system and with all its faults that would not be a good thing.
The fundamental problem is that sentences more likely to lead to rehabilitation of criminals who are not yet adults, are also those likely to offend public opinion and, not least, the victims. Doubtless there will be similar cases with the recent drive to keep female offenders out of prison.
Leaving this case to one side, perhaps we should look around the world for justice and prison systems that work and copy those.
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
I agree on your first point but I'm not at all sure about the second. Lots of judges are not very good including quite a few who seem to have a fairly sketchy understanding of laws and legal procedures. And those judges - particularly this judge - need to be disciplined properly and removed, if only because his actions have actually undermined the rule of law by effectively saying rape and child pornography are not worthy of punishment - regardless of what he said, that sends a message they are not serious crimes and such is not the case.
But unless more is revealed by that process I wouldn't go so far as a criminal investigation. Leaving aside the fact that it's not a crime to be a stupid twat, I can think of all sorts of ways a dodgy government could exploit that to undermine the court system and with all its faults that would not be a good thing.
The fundamental problem is that sentences more likely to lead to rehabilitation of criminals who are not yet adults, are also those likely to offend public opinion and, not least, the victims. Doubtless there will be similar cases with the recent drive to keep female offenders out of prison.
Leaving this case to one side, perhaps we should look around the world for justice and prison systems that work and copy those.
The main purpose of prison is to keep dangerous people away from the public.
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
I agree on your first point but I'm not at all sure about the second. Lots of judges are not very good including quite a few who seem to have a fairly sketchy understanding of laws and legal procedures. And those judges - particularly this judge - need to be disciplined properly and removed, if only because his actions have actually undermined the rule of law by effectively saying rape and child pornography are not worthy of punishment - regardless of what he said, that sends a message they are not serious crimes and such is not the case.
But unless more is revealed by that process I wouldn't go so far as a criminal investigation. Leaving aside the fact that it's not a crime to be a stupid twat, I can think of all sorts of ways a dodgy government could exploit that to undermine the court system and with all its faults that would not be a good thing.
The fundamental problem is that sentences more likely to lead to rehabilitation of criminals who are not yet adults, are also those likely to offend public opinion and, not least, the victims. Doubtless there will be similar cases with the recent drive to keep female offenders out of prison.
Leaving this case to one side, perhaps we should look around the world for justice and prison systems that work and copy those.
The problem is, it sends the message that if you are a victim of sexual assault by an under 16 there is no point reporting it because nothing of note will happen to the perpetrators.
Speaking as somebody who has many years' experience of working with adolescents, that is an exceptionally dumb message to send on all levels. Too many teenage boys will be hearing that and drawing their own conclusions.
Report in the Sunday Times that some civil service unions might refuse to cooperate with an incoming Reform government.
I'm not Reform, but this yanks my chain.
The voters are in charge. If they elect a Reform government you bloody well jump to it, same as Green, Labour, LD, Conservative, YourParty or anyone else.
I think it would be a mistake. The ability of the British State to capture political movements, and moderate them, is a defining feature! Look at the Labour Party, or even the SNP cohort in Westminster. Wasn't one of them looking for a seat in the Lords recently? If Reform are denied their proper place, victory would make them even angrier than it normally does.
Civil Servants are obviously free to resign if they don't want to, or feel they are unable to, implement the policies of a Reform Government.
If the Civil Service or even a fraction of it failed to co-operate then that is Gold for the government. Serious sackings and probably removal of accrued pension rights.
Income tax on overtime above a 40-hour week should be scrapped for workers earning less than £75,000, Reform UK has said.
The party estimates what it is calling a "hard work bonus" would save a full time nurse working six hours of overtime each week more than £1,300 a year.
Reform said the policy would cost £5bn a year and could be paid for through its plans to make cuts to welfare payments.
Reform need to stop thinking about Trump style gimmicks and start thinking about economic plans which are both constructive and coherent.
And any tax changes should be kept as simple as possible which the above certainly isn't.
In principle, I like the idea that overtime should be untaxed in principle, and have thought about it as a policy in the past. The idea that the harder you work, the more the state takes off you is pretty egregious, it would be much fairer that if you pay your taxes, then you are "done" and the rest you earn is yours to keep is very appealing.
Unfortunately, the problem is but a moment's thought demonstrates that this is completely unworkable. For starters for ten, to stop people gaming the system, we'd have to have legally valid clocking in and out systems to know what hours has been worked. Otherwise, it will take employers and employees very little time to start colluding to work their base hours for minimal pay, then do tons of imaginary overtime paid at untaxed double time/triple time etc.
Then there are loads of fairness problems. Why should I pay tax on 40 hrs a week, when my mate who works 40hrs gets his last 4 hours tax free, because he's contracted to 36 hrs? What about people on zero hours? Etc, etc.
The daft thing is that Reform have loads of room for popular proposals to fix the tax system, particularly the problems with benefit withdrawal rates at the bottom end, and the daft £100k tax supertax rate near the top.
I could also point out that Reform seem unaware that people are mostly paid monthly rather than weekly.
Or that this wouldn't benefit people on a fixed salary.
Or that workers could easily game the system by doing lots of overtime one week followed by fewer than standard hours the following week.
Or that workers would be incentivised to lower their productivity so that work can be dragged out into tax free overtime.
I don't think points 1 and 3 are things that couldn't be ironed out. It is already the case with benefits that things get averaged out. Same as the most low brow suggestion of what if people charged a £1000 / hr for overtime, again that is pretty easy to combat.
But there are so many other major issues its not a serious policy, its an election stunt, that will be get kicked into the long grass in a few months.
I can't see any way around people conspiring with their employers to fudge their nominal wages and hours, short of government mandated clocking in machines. If I'm employing someone for £18/hr for an actual 36hrs, and reporting it as minimum wage for 36hrs plus a pile of overtime they will pay a lot less tax under this policy.
Lots of better ways to fix the tax system than this.
The low hanging fruit for a Reform right wing is higher tax free threshold with reduced in work benefits, remove cliff edges at £60k and £100...and if you want to be really radical things like combining NI and IC. However, all of this requires some serious hard work and careful thinking to get right (there will be winner and losers however you do it).
A suspect somebody at Reform has looked and said loads of people in Makersfield work shifts / paid per hour type jobs, this is a way we can show loads of leg of your taxes are too high, here is a freebie.
Plus its also a Trump tax gimmick - Reform's default source of policy ideas.
Whereas, as you say, the actually useful policies require careful thinking, hard work and proper planning.
The likes of Thatcher, Howe and Tebbit were willing to do that.
Farage, Tice and Kruger are not.
Half our problem is that since Thatcher (and a less extent Blair) no-one has done the careful thinking and proper planning.
So instead we tinker at the edges creating those awful cliff edges because it's the slightly less painful of 2 options (it more severely impacts those impacted but impacts few people and hey the people impacted are wealthy so the people who have been spared are happy to see those impacted pay even more tax).
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
I agree on your first point but I'm not at all sure about the second. Lots of judges are not very good including quite a few who seem to have a fairly sketchy understanding of laws and legal procedures. And those judges - particularly this judge - need to be disciplined properly and removed, if only because his actions have actually undermined the rule of law by effectively saying rape and child pornography are not worthy of punishment - regardless of what he said, that sends a message they are not serious crimes and such is not the case.
But unless more is revealed by that process I wouldn't go so far as a criminal investigation. Leaving aside the fact that it's not a crime to be a stupid twat, I can think of all sorts of ways a dodgy government could exploit that to undermine the court system and with all its faults that would not be a good thing.
The fundamental problem is that sentences more likely to lead to rehabilitation of criminals who are not yet adults, are also those likely to offend public opinion and, not least, the victims. Doubtless there will be similar cases with the recent drive to keep female offenders out of prison.
Leaving this case to one side, perhaps we should look around the world for justice and prison systems that work and copy those.
The problem is, it sends the message that if you are a victim of sexual assault by an under 16 there is no point reporting it because nothing of note will happen to the perpetrators.
Speaking as somebody who has many years' experience of working with adolescents, that is an exceptionally dumb message to send on all levels. Too many teenage boys will be hearing that and drawing their own conclusions.
I am enjoying a work free weekend. My first this year. Why? Because my face swelled up like a balloon from an abscess. Although I’ve had an emergency drilling on Friday and some antibiotics I still feel cruddy. So I’ve got my feet up doing nowt and it’s bliss.
Big abscess isn’t exactly fun, but the timing was perfect. Started Wednesday night after flying back into the UK. Home Thursday and face swelled like a bad thing, dentist Friday. Unpleasant. 5 days of antibiotics. And then away again for 3 days. So it could have been worse!
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
I agree on your first point but I'm not at all sure about the second. Lots of judges are not very good including quite a few who seem to have a fairly sketchy understanding of laws and legal procedures. And those judges - particularly this judge - need to be disciplined properly and removed, if only because his actions have actually undermined the rule of law by effectively saying rape and child pornography are not worthy of punishment - regardless of what he said, that sends a message they are not serious crimes and such is not the case.
But unless more is revealed by that process I wouldn't go so far as a criminal investigation. Leaving aside the fact that it's not a crime to be a stupid twat, I can think of all sorts of ways a dodgy government could exploit that to undermine the court system and with all its faults that would not be a good thing.
The fundamental problem is that sentences more likely to lead to rehabilitation of criminals who are not yet adults, are also those likely to offend public opinion and, not least, the victims. Doubtless there will be similar cases with the recent drive to keep female offenders out of prison.
Leaving this case to one side, perhaps we should look around the world for justice and prison systems that work and copy those.
The main purpose of prison is to keep dangerous people away from the public.
Since all but about 60 of the 80,000 prisoners are at some point intended to emerge to live next door to somebody, it is in the public interest that the main purpose of prison for the 79,940 should be to ensure they come out substantially better people. Of the other 60, yes.
Anyway, my prediction for the great relegation battle. West Ham will beat Leeds, but Spurs will save themselves by securing a 1-1 draw with a streaky equaliser in the last 10. Noting here, Everton's recent propensity for conceding late goals, a propensity they share with Boro (sob ...)
You been spying on their secret plan?
In the two relevant games, Spurs v Everton, West Ham v Leeds there are nine possible combinations of outcome. Of these 8 result in Spurs staying up, and only one results in Spurs' relegation. Bet accordingly.
I shall carry on hoping Spurs go down, but the odds are not favourable.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
Further to your analogy a lot of people (including me) think that once Scotland becomes independent that the SNP will cease to exist, though there may be a vaguely centre left successor party with a different name. With Israel, once the state came into being Zionism mutated into a super bug that infected the whole body politic.
Would you say the same about the ANC?
Sinn Fein would be the interesting one. A case could be made that it has formed every government in Ireland since the Executive Council was first formed in 1922, but I don't think the current group calling itself Sinn Fein would agree with that.
Congress Party in India still exists, though currently in opposition.
RIP Jeremy Hanley, local Richmond MP and inspiration for one of the great political lines after returning to parliament after the 1983 GE:
“Mrs Thatcher, I want to thank you. I won by just 74 votes and without them I wouldn’t be here. I think your visit to the constituency made all the difference. You are responsible for those 74 votes.”
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
Further to your analogy a lot of people (including me) think that once Scotland becomes independent that the SNP will cease to exist, though there may be a vaguely centre left successor party with a different name. With Israel, once the state came into being Zionism mutated into a super bug that infected the whole body politic.
Would you say the same about the ANC?
Sinn Fein would be the interesting one. A case could be made that it has formed every government in Ireland since the Executive Council was first formed in 1922, but I don't think the current group calling itself Sinn Fein would agree with that.
Current Sinn Fein regard the two parties that split from them (Fine Gael and Fianna Fail) as sell-outs, yes.
Oddly, though, they deride them both as "civil war parties" when, of course, they were also part of the civil war, Fianna Fail not splitting from Sinn Fein until after the civil war, when Dev decided to take the oath to the British King while saying he didn't mean it.
The victim in the unduly lenient sentencing case has rightly criticisedthe judge. I think the government needs to act and remove him from the bench and probably open up a criminal investigation to look at his own internet and personal history.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
I agree on your first point but I'm not at all sure about the second. Lots of judges are not very good including quite a few who seem to have a fairly sketchy understanding of laws and legal procedures. And those judges - particularly this judge - need to be disciplined properly and removed, if only because his actions have actually undermined the rule of law by effectively saying rape and child pornography are not worthy of punishment - regardless of what he said, that sends a message they are not serious crimes and such is not the case.
But unless more is revealed by that process I wouldn't go so far as a criminal investigation. Leaving aside the fact that it's not a crime to be a stupid twat, I can think of all sorts of ways a dodgy government could exploit that to undermine the court system and with all its faults that would not be a good thing.
The fundamental problem is that sentences more likely to lead to rehabilitation of criminals who are not yet adults, are also those likely to offend public opinion and, not least, the victims. Doubtless there will be similar cases with the recent drive to keep female offenders out of prison.
Leaving this case to one side, perhaps we should look around the world for justice and prison systems that work and copy those.
The problem is, it sends the message that if you are a victim of sexual assault by an under 16 there is no point reporting it because nothing of note will happen to the perpetrators.
Speaking as somebody who has many years' experience of working with adolescents, that is an exceptionally dumb message to send on all levels. Too many teenage boys will be hearing that and drawing their own conclusions.
Norway is much keener on rehab of offenders than we are.
\Has anyone any idea what would have happened to these lads in Norway?
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
Further to your analogy a lot of people (including me) think that once Scotland becomes independent that the SNP will cease to exist, though there may be a vaguely centre left successor party with a different name. With Israel, once the state came into being Zionism mutated into a super bug that infected the whole body politic.
You'd have thought (and certainly hoped) so. Nationalism in pursuit of self-determination is different to nationalism once it's achieved.
An ongoing overtly 'nationalist' party in Scotland post independence would be your version of one of these 'great again' outfits that are stinking up the place wherever you look, attracting people of similar bent.
It would poll whatever it polled but it wouldn't be the same voters who support the SNP today. No doubt a few but not the mass of them. Certainly not you I think I can risk a pound saying.
I guess the pool to fish in (for MSGA) would be the Alba/Reform space.
Report in the Sunday Times that some civil service unions might refuse to cooperate with an incoming Reform government.
I'm not Reform, but this yanks my chain.
The voters are in charge. If they elect a Reform government you bloody well jump to it, same as Green, Labour, LD, Conservative, YourParty or anyone else.
I think it would be a mistake. The ability of the British State to capture political movements, and moderate them, is a defining feature! Look at the Labour Party, or even the SNP cohort in Westminster. Wasn't one of them looking for a seat in the Lords recently? If Reform are denied their proper place, victory would make them even angrier than it normally does.
Civil Servants are obviously free to resign if they don't want to, or feel they are unable to, implement the policies of a Reform Government.
Worse, stories like this probably increase the likelihood of people actually voting Reform.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
Further to your analogy a lot of people (including me) think that once Scotland becomes independent that the SNP will cease to exist, though there may be a vaguely centre left successor party with a different name. With Israel, once the state came into being Zionism mutated into a super bug that infected the whole body politic.
Would you say the same about the ANC?
Sinn Fein would be the interesting one. A case could be made that it has formed every government in Ireland since the Executive Council was first formed in 1922, but I don't think the current group calling itself Sinn Fein would agree with that.
Current Sinn Fein regard the two parties that split from them (Fine Gael and Fianna Fail) as sell-outs, yes.
Oddly, though, they deride them both as "civil war parties" when, of course, they were also part of the civil war, Fianna Fail not splitting from Sinn Fein until after the civil war, when Dev decided to take the oath to the British King while saying he didn't mean it.
Even the Irish Labour Party is connected - Democratic Left merged with them in 1992. Democratic Left were splinters from the IRSP, who themselves split from the Official Sinn Fein.
I am enjoying a work free weekend. My first this year. Why? Because my face swelled up like a balloon from an abscess. Although I’ve had an emergency drilling on Friday and some antibiotics I still feel cruddy. So I’ve got my feet up doing nowt and it’s bliss.
Big abscess isn’t exactly fun, but the timing was perfect. Started Wednesday night after flying back into the UK. Home Thursday and face swelled like a bad thing, dentist Friday. Unpleasant. 5 days of antibiotics. And then away again for 3 days. So it could have been worse!
I am enjoying a work free weekend. My first this year. Why? Because my face swelled up like a balloon from an abscess. Although I’ve had an emergency drilling on Friday and some antibiotics I still feel cruddy. So I’ve got my feet up doing nowt and it’s bliss.
Big abscess isn’t exactly fun, but the timing was perfect. Started Wednesday night after flying back into the UK. Home Thursday and face swelled like a bad thing, dentist Friday. Unpleasant. 5 days of antibiotics. And then away again for 3 days. So it could have been worse!
Report in the Sunday Times that some civil service unions might refuse to cooperate with an incoming Reform government.
I'm not Reform, but this yanks my chain.
The voters are in charge. If they elect a Reform government you bloody well jump to it, same as Green, Labour, LD, Conservative, YourParty or anyone else.
just sack the useless twats, doubt anyone would notice any difference
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
Further to your analogy a lot of people (including me) think that once Scotland becomes independent that the SNP will cease to exist, though there may be a vaguely centre left successor party with a different name. With Israel, once the state came into being Zionism mutated into a super bug that infected the whole body politic.
Would you say the same about the ANC?
Sinn Fein would be the interesting one. A case could be made that it has formed every government in Ireland since the Executive Council was first formed in 1922, but I don't think the current group calling itself Sinn Fein would agree with that.
Current Sinn Fein regard the two parties that split from them (Fine Gael and Fianna Fail) as sell-outs, yes.
Oddly, though, they deride them both as "civil war parties" when, of course, they were also part of the civil war, Fianna Fail not splitting from Sinn Fein until after the civil war, when Dev decided to take the oath to the British King while saying he didn't mean it.
Even the Irish Labour Party is connected - Democratic Left merged with them in 1992. Democratic Left were splinters from the IRSP, who themselves split from the Official Sinn Fein.
Ooops, misremembered - make that 1999!
DL actually split from the Workers' Party in 1992, descendants of Official Sinn Fein, who, of course split from the Provos in 1970.
PS. It's really worth listening to BBC's 1.o'clock News. I can only think it has something to do with the imminent departure of Keir Starmer. and the changed attitude in the US. Channel 4 have been the only station to have covered the real news there for at least 2 years
Ah yes Channel 4 News. Who's international affairs editor Dominic Waghorn enjoys attending parties at the Iranian Embassy. Helped him get a good scoop of course.
Dom works for Sky News and has for many years but nice smear.
Sorry Sky News. Is accusing him of working for Channel 4 a smear?
No, but you had to resort to lying so you couldn’t respond to the substantive of one of PB’s few Jewish posters.
It wasn't a lie it was a mistake. I don't think Channel 4 are as bad as the wretched Sky News but they are instinctively left wing.
There may be other Jewish posters on pb who don't identify themselves. And its pretty clear that Roger is out of touch with the vast majority of British Jews, who are on the whole a pretty moderate and liberal bunch.
But you don’t know any Jewish people do you?
I do, so does Roger.
Actually I do know at least one.
Polling suggests the vast majority consider themselves Zionists. When impeccable liberal leftists like Hadley Freeman, David Baddiel and Simon Schama are beside themselves about the state of our national conversation it tells me something.
Any regrets about sharing that NYT piece about Israeli dogs raping Palestinian prisoners?
No it doesn't - at least not in the sense of supporting whatever the Israeli government does. See
Why should Zionism be defined as whatever the current Israeli government does? Why should a bunch of antisemites and grievance ridden adolescent leftists be allowed to determine the meaning of it?
Neither can it just be "Israel has the right to exist" unless we want to denude it of value.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
Further to your analogy a lot of people (including me) think that once Scotland becomes independent that the SNP will cease to exist, though there may be a vaguely centre left successor party with a different name. With Israel, once the state came into being Zionism mutated into a super bug that infected the whole body politic.
Would you say the same about the ANC?
Sinn Fein would be the interesting one. A case could be made that it has formed every government in Ireland since the Executive Council was first formed in 1922, but I don't think the current group calling itself Sinn Fein would agree with that.
Current Sinn Fein regard the two parties that split from them (Fine Gael and Fianna Fail) as sell-outs, yes.
Oddly, though, they deride them both as "civil war parties" when, of course, they were also part of the civil war, Fianna Fail not splitting from Sinn Fein until after the civil war, when Dev decided to take the oath to the British King while saying he didn't mean it.
Even the Irish Labour Party is connected - Democratic Left merged with them in 1992. Democratic Left were splinters from the IRSP, who themselves split from the Official Sinn Fein.
Ooops, misremembered - make that 1999!
DL actually split from the Workers' Party in 1992, descendants of Official Sinn Fein, who, of course split from the Provos in 1970.
Isn't that what happens, and indeed should happen, after a real nationalist party has achieved it's aim? Conservative nationalists go one way, socialist another and centrists a third.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
The minor flaw in that argument is that it was a complete waste of time and effort.
From the header,
The reporting is quite balanced: about 8/10 Labour voters would rejoin, including pluralities in all the Leave-voting constituencies. But there is reluctance to reopen divisive debates. (This could be a brake on Labour rejoiners - though exhaustion also a brake on Reform in places like Makerfield)
In other words, Brexit is a ghastly heirloom that we're stuck with for fear of a family argument leading to the rewriting of someone's will. As I may have said before.
Then the questions become:
Is there a threshold where the pushback on joining doesn't have to be feared?
If so, what is that threshold?
If so, will passive factors cause that threshold to be reached?
If so, when?
If so, what do we all do in the meantime?
Other questions:
Brexit has been unpopular because its implementation is associated with some disastrous policies on immigration, and a general feeling of drift, malaise, and decline. What's the expiry date on this equation?
Is it feasible as time passes to continue to blame the country's many problems on some barriers to trade that came in in 2019?
How can a Government perform well and still leave room for 'everything being shit due to Brexit'?
Is is not inevitable that any Government that wants to govern well run into retained EU legislation, or things like the ECHR, and want to alter these laws to prevent bat tunnels, theme parks being stopped due to jumping spiders, and the other EU-origin absurdities making Britain ungovernable and uneconomical?
there are high speed railways being built all over EU countries with no bat tunnels, think you need to re-assess where our troubles lie.
France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and many other EU countries are all capable of building infrastructure at a fraction of the cost we do in the UK.
Something other than EU membership hampers our ability to invest in this country!!!
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
The minor flaw in that argument is that it was a complete waste of time and effort.
From the header,
The reporting is quite balanced: about 8/10 Labour voters would rejoin, including pluralities in all the Leave-voting constituencies. But there is reluctance to reopen divisive debates. (This could be a brake on Labour rejoiners - though exhaustion also a brake on Reform in places like Makerfield)
In other words, Brexit is a ghastly heirloom that we're stuck with for fear of a family argument leading to the rewriting of someone's will. As I may have said before.
Then the questions become:
Is there a threshold where the pushback on joining doesn't have to be feared?
If so, what is that threshold?
If so, will passive factors cause that threshold to be reached?
If so, when?
If so, what do we all do in the meantime?
Other questions:
Brexit has been unpopular because its implementation is associated with some disastrous policies on immigration, and a general feeling of drift, malaise, and decline. What's the expiry date on this equation?
Is it feasible as time passes to continue to blame the country's many problems on some barriers to trade that came in in 2019?
How can a Government perform well and still leave room for 'everything being shit due to Brexit'?
Is is not inevitable that any Government that wants to govern well run into retained EU legislation, or things like the ECHR, and want to alter these laws to prevent bat tunnels, theme parks being stopped due to jumping spiders, and the other EU-origin absurdities making Britain ungovernable and uneconomical?
there are high speed railways being built all over EU countries with no bat tunnels, think you need to re-assess where our troubles lie.
France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and many other EU countries are all capable of building infrastructure at a fraction of the cost we do in the UK.
Something other than EU membership hampers our ability to invest in this country!!!
These days, Germany is having a lot of the same issues as the UK with building stuff. The rate of high speed rail, particularly actually making the rolling stock, is absolutely glacial compared to China. China have taken the car production model, modernised it, and applied it to train production.
It’s not clear to me whether the relegation of the Tories into the Lib-Dems of the Right will hold long term. But if it does the Tories becoming an essentially southern, upper middle class, free market party will soften their stance down from the hardest of Brexits only over time. Already some 40% of their voters polled said they’d vote Rejoin in a referendum. https://x.com/b_judah/status/2058451267316281511
Chelsea 2-0 down to the Mackens, who if things stay as they are will be in Europe and Chelsea won't be.
Tricky one for people who dislike Chelsea. Being out of Europe means it damages their finances and they have run out of hotels to sell to themselves but they will benefit by having more time with Alonso on the training pitch and can see them doing well in the league next season as they have a lot of good players and Xabi is a good coach.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
The minor flaw in that argument is that it was a complete waste of time and effort.
From the header,
The reporting is quite balanced: about 8/10 Labour voters would rejoin, including pluralities in all the Leave-voting constituencies. But there is reluctance to reopen divisive debates. (This could be a brake on Labour rejoiners - though exhaustion also a brake on Reform in places like Makerfield)
In other words, Brexit is a ghastly heirloom that we're stuck with for fear of a family argument leading to the rewriting of someone's will. As I may have said before.
Then the questions become:
Is there a threshold where the pushback on joining doesn't have to be feared?
If so, what is that threshold?
If so, will passive factors cause that threshold to be reached?
If so, when?
If so, what do we all do in the meantime?
Other questions:
Brexit has been unpopular because its implementation is associated with some disastrous policies on immigration, and a general feeling of drift, malaise, and decline. What's the expiry date on this equation?
Is it feasible as time passes to continue to blame the country's many problems on some barriers to trade that came in in 2019?
How can a Government perform well and still leave room for 'everything being shit due to Brexit'?
Is is not inevitable that any Government that wants to govern well run into retained EU legislation, or things like the ECHR, and want to alter these laws to prevent bat tunnels, theme parks being stopped due to jumping spiders, and the other EU-origin absurdities making Britain ungovernable and uneconomical?
there are high speed railways being built all over EU countries with no bat tunnels, think you need to re-assess where our troubles lie.
France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and many other EU countries are all capable of building infrastructure at a fraction of the cost we do in the UK.
Something other than EU membership hampers our ability to invest in this country!!!
These days, Germany is having a lot of the same issues as the UK with building stuff. The rate of high speed rail, particularly actually making the rolling stock, is absolutely glacial compared to China. China have taken the car production model, modernised it, and applied it to train production.
Indeed, but not remotely EU related, more the Merkel years saw very low capex investment in the countries infrastructure.
If you want us to become more efficient and effictive at spending money you have a constant, reliable, guarenteed long term stream of cash, do not turn it on and off.
HS2 is a great example of a hugely complex scheme which we simply did not have the skills for in the country.
In 10 years we will, we should already be planning what to do next, making use of those skills to do it more effectively and miles cheaper.
So Byline Times say they have an archive of Reform Candidate former twitter account. If that's as bad as it gets, I am sure the Guardian types will be outraged (just as they were about him joking about rugby players with big knockers and water boarding people who eat their chips by the sea), but it isn't exactly that different from stuff Farage tweets (albeit he is usually a bit more careful to leave some wiggle room).
Reform candidate leans heavily anti-immigration and tweets at the likes of Dapper Laughs and Dan Wooton isn't exactly even takes £5 million off a crypto billionaire.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
The minor flaw in that argument is that it was a complete waste of time and effort.
From the header,
The reporting is quite balanced: about 8/10 Labour voters would rejoin, including pluralities in all the Leave-voting constituencies. But there is reluctance to reopen divisive debates. (This could be a brake on Labour rejoiners - though exhaustion also a brake on Reform in places like Makerfield)
In other words, Brexit is a ghastly heirloom that we're stuck with for fear of a family argument leading to the rewriting of someone's will. As I may have said before.
Then the questions become:
Is there a threshold where the pushback on joining doesn't have to be feared?
If so, what is that threshold?
If so, will passive factors cause that threshold to be reached?
If so, when?
If so, what do we all do in the meantime?
Other questions:
Brexit has been unpopular because its implementation is associated with some disastrous policies on immigration, and a general feeling of drift, malaise, and decline. What's the expiry date on this equation?
Is it feasible as time passes to continue to blame the country's many problems on some barriers to trade that came in in 2019?
How can a Government perform well and still leave room for 'everything being shit due to Brexit'?
Is is not inevitable that any Government that wants to govern well run into retained EU legislation, or things like the ECHR, and want to alter these laws to prevent bat tunnels, theme parks being stopped due to jumping spiders, and the other EU-origin absurdities making Britain ungovernable and uneconomical?
there are high speed railways being built all over EU countries with no bat tunnels, think you need to re-assess where our troubles lie.
France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and many other EU countries are all capable of building infrastructure at a fraction of the cost we do in the UK.
Something other than EU membership hampers our ability to invest in this country!!!
It has nothing to do with 'ability to invest' - the bat tunnel was a direct result of Natural England enforcing the EU's 2017 Habitats and Species Regulations, which are part of retained EU law.
If we wish to prevent future bat tunnels, we need to remove the retained law, and remove Natural England's legal right to enforce such laws without reference to Ministers. Doing so would mean we would no longer be aligned with EU species regulations, and make the prospect of rejoining harder and less attractive. But it is becoming increasingly difficult to argue that we should keep the country in a Miss Havisham-like state of being ready to marry the EU in the future, when their laws are serving our needs so poorly.
It’s not clear to me whether the relegation of the Tories into the Lib-Dems of the Right will hold long term. But if it does the Tories becoming an essentially southern, upper middle class, free market party will soften their stance down from the hardest of Brexits only over time. Already some 40% of their voters polled said they’d vote Rejoin in a referendum. https://x.com/b_judah/status/2058451267316281511
I’ve always said that the Tories won’t get back to dominant status until they have a leader from the upcoming generation who is prepared to take the party back to its traditional pragmatic pro-European stance.
The RAF’s Training Crisis: Hawk Failures, Red Arrows Struggles, and the AJT Decision https://x.com/MtarfaL/status/2058569667682218426 .. 25/25 The upcoming AJT decision represents a critical opportunity. Choosing the right platform, paired with innovative use of assets like a re-roled Red Arrows element, could begin reversing decline. Britain once led the world in advanced training aircraft. Reclaiming credibility demands stable funding, honest requirements, and genuine long-term commitment. The coming months will show whether those lessons have finally been learned...
I'd choose whoever is prepared to offer the best offsets between the Koreans and the Italians (the latter's GCAP commitment is also worth considering).
And for 'effs sake, don't let the RAF try to gold plate whichever solution we pick.
We'll keep working our way back to eu babe - with a burning desire to rectify a serious mistake but all in the fullness of time and without the stress and angst that came with leaving.
No you won't, and if you did, we'd just take us out straight away again.
You fuckers aren't going to win.
But if support for Brexit remains where it is, let alone sinks further, surely the issue will be re-opened at some point?
The big advantage Brexiteers have at the the moment is that support for rejoining seems to shrink when people realise the terms on which we would need to re-enter (i.e money and free movement).
No. Your total failure to read the tea leaves correctly and think in only one dimension is your problem.
Not mine.
Nobody wants to go back to status quo ante referendum because the last decade would look a complete waste of time and effort.
The minor flaw in that argument is that it was a complete waste of time and effort.
From the header,
The reporting is quite balanced: about 8/10 Labour voters would rejoin, including pluralities in all the Leave-voting constituencies. But there is reluctance to reopen divisive debates. (This could be a brake on Labour rejoiners - though exhaustion also a brake on Reform in places like Makerfield)
In other words, Brexit is a ghastly heirloom that we're stuck with for fear of a family argument leading to the rewriting of someone's will. As I may have said before.
Then the questions become:
Is there a threshold where the pushback on joining doesn't have to be feared?
If so, what is that threshold?
If so, will passive factors cause that threshold to be reached?
If so, when?
If so, what do we all do in the meantime?
Other questions:
Brexit has been unpopular because its implementation is associated with some disastrous policies on immigration, and a general feeling of drift, malaise, and decline. What's the expiry date on this equation?
Is it feasible as time passes to continue to blame the country's many problems on some barriers to trade that came in in 2019?
How can a Government perform well and still leave room for 'everything being shit due to Brexit'?
Is is not inevitable that any Government that wants to govern well run into retained EU legislation, or things like the ECHR, and want to alter these laws to prevent bat tunnels, theme parks being stopped due to jumping spiders, and the other EU-origin absurdities making Britain ungovernable and uneconomical?
there are high speed railways being built all over EU countries with no bat tunnels, think you need to re-assess where our troubles lie.
France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and many other EU countries are all capable of building infrastructure at a fraction of the cost we do in the UK.
Something other than EU membership hampers our ability to invest in this country!!!
It has nothing to do with 'ability to invest' - the bat tunnel was a direct result of Natural England enforcing the EU's 2017 Habitats and Species Regulations, which are part of retained EU law.
If we wish to prevent future bat tunnels, we need to remove the retained law, and remove Natural England's legal right to enforce such laws without reference to Ministers. Doing so would mean we would no longer be aligned with EU species regulations, and make the prospect of rejoining harder and less attractive. But it is becoming increasingly hard to argue that we should keep the country in a Miss Havisham-like state of being ready to marry the EU in the future, when their laws are serving our needs so poorly.
Or we do what the rest of the EU does and ignore the bits that are awkward / expensive / pointless and use some other means of mitigation
Comments
The reporting is quite balanced: about 8/10 Labour voters would rejoin, including pluralities in all the Leave-voting constituencies. But there is reluctance to reopen divisive debates. (This could be a brake on Labour rejoiners - though exhaustion also a brake on Reform in places like Makerfield)
In other words, Brexit is a ghastly heirloom that we're stuck with for fear of a family argument leading to the rewriting of someone's will. As I may have said before.
Then the questions become:
Is there a threshold where the pushback on joining doesn't have to be feared?
If so, what is that threshold?
If so, will passive factors cause that threshold to be reached?
If so, when?
If so, what do we all do in the meantime?
The reform had no significant impact at all on the number of hours worked. It did, however, result in an increase in the overtime declared by skilled employees seeking to maximize the tax benefits it offered without actually working more hours.
Because they get to (re)define absolutely everything these days.
'Genocide' where the target population actually increases in size? Sure, no problem!
'Far right' based on how much one wants to emulate the immigration policies of the GDR, NK etc. Yeah, why not, it's about how it *feels* to say the words....
And so on. Throw in a few disingenuous strawmen about the influence of the 'right wing media' (which hasn't been influential in ages and isn't really right wing) and you're sorted!
We really are in Orwellian times where the Authoritarian Left get to call the shots and get to change the definitions to make it ok.
Prior to 7 October I would never have called myself a zionist. Now I would unequivocally say that I am.
Just shows up everything I haven't done yet - so no images!
Rejoin is a vast mountain range of wanky hopium - until such point as the French and German economies are running way ahead of that of the UK and there can be no doubt it is solely down to being in the EU. That is an age away - certainly at current growth rates, the membership fees could not remotely be justified.
Brexit has been unpopular because its implementation is associated with some disastrous policies on immigration, and a general feeling of drift, malaise, and decline. What's the expiry date on this equation?
Is it feasible as time passes to continue to blame the country's many problems on some barriers to trade that came in in 2019?
How can a Government perform well and still leave room for 'everything being shit due to Brexit'?
Is is not inevitable that any Government that wants to govern well run into retained EU legislation, or things like the ECHR, and want to alter these laws to prevent bat tunnels, theme parks being stopped due to jumping spiders, and the other EU-origin absurdities making Britain ungovernable and uneconomical?
Israel = 22,000 sq. km. in area (roughly the size of Wales)
I do not for a second think the Electoral Staff would do anything untoward, and I'm not being sarcastic when I say that.
If I am wrong about that then a lot of people are going to be sharing the same cell. That would be serious stuff, certainly the ARO, Acting Returning Officer would and must be sacked AND removed from any accrued pension rights as per a bent copper. I cannot believe that could happen even in Tower Hamlets.
No, the forms would have been filled out in a way which gave the impression the candidates existed, were lawfully entitled to stand, were willing to stand and if they were described as "independent" were independent.
I wish I could be as sanguine about the police handling of this complaint. I have seen at least three occasion where a credible case of electoral fraud was sidelined by the police in such a way as to overshoot the deadline, 6 months. When I walk into 10 Downing Street, those police will wish I hadn't.
It originally meant supporting the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine. But that has happened. It's a historical fact. So Zionism has taken on another connotation to reflect this reality.
Eg if Scotland became independent the term "Scottish Nationalism" would afterwards assume a different meaning. It would signify something more parochial and aggressive.
Ditto Zionism now that the Jewish state in Palestine is long established. It means agreeing that it should continue to exist, yes, but it also specifically means supporting its claim to a larger territory and the subjugation to this end of the rights of Palestinians.
But if you want to describe everybody in the world who does not wish to see Israel destroyed as Zionists, ok you stick with that.
I'm a Zionist then, by that metric, despite being pro Palestinian on most of the salient contentious issues pertaining to the conflict.
The voters are in charge. If they elect a Reform government you bloody well jump to it, same as Green, Labour, LD, Conservative, YourParty or anyone else.
“NASCAR driver Kyle Busch died from severe pneumonia that progressed into sepsis,” according to a statement provided by the Busch family on Saturday.
https://x.com/DrJesseMorse/status/2058217657757823326
He thought it was just a persistent sinus infection.
I shall carry on hoping Spurs go down, but the odds are not favourable.
The tiny drawback is that we're talking Reform here, who are a bunch of grifting swivel-eyed loons even less fit to manage a government role than Amanda Spielman.
The judgement was so far askew that the judge's motivations for this kind of sentencing needs to be properly investigated and at the very least he can't be allowed to pass any judgements again.
Civil Servants are obviously free to resign if they don't want to, or feel they are unable to, implement the policies of a Reform Government.
But unless more is revealed by that process I wouldn't go so far as a criminal investigation. Leaving aside the fact that it's not a crime to be a stupid twat, I can think of all sorts of ways a dodgy government could exploit that to undermine the court system and with all its faults that would not be a good thing.
Ken Clarke got a lot of grief for saying some rapes are worse than others. Does premeditation have an impact in rape sentencing the same way it would with murder? This was obviously a carefully planned crime which surely makes it worse. And before blaming the judge one has to look at the sentencing guidelines. Has he actually gone against those. Hardly his fault if he's merely following government instruction.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cjrp98285yvo
"After two years of strong post-pandemic recovery, California’s population dipped last year, new state estimates show.
The decline was marginal — roughly 54,000 people from January 2025 to January 2026, putting the state population at just under 39.6 million — but still notable for a state whose population had only recently bounced back from the pandemic."
https://www.sfchronicle.com/california/article/population-decline-data-22240407.php
Whereas, as you say, the actually useful policies require careful thinking, hard work and proper planning.
The likes of Thatcher, Howe and Tebbit were willing to do that.
Farage, Tice and Kruger are not.
https://www.mprnews.org/story/2026/05/13/jd-vance-antifraud-task-force-halts-medicare-enrollments-home-healthcare-hospice-providers
The Trump administration on Wednesday pursued new efforts in a sweeping initiative to root out fraud in federal health programs, including announcing a nationwide six-month freeze on some new Medicare enrollments and warning states to actively investigate Medicaid fraud or risk losing funding.
The moves are related to Vice President JD Vance's anti-fraud task force, which has been accelerating its messaging before the November elections. The panel set up by Republican President Donald Trump seeks to crack down on potential misuse of public money.
The most significant step Wednesday came from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services with a nationwide six-month moratorium on all new Medicare enrolments by providers of hospice and home care...
Here are the guidelines:
https://sentencingcouncil.org.uk/guidelines/sexual-offences-sentencing-children-and-young-people/
In theory you could look at those and talk about community orders.
However, given that this involved grooming, the creation of child pornography and the sharing of child pornography that should as made clear below actually have elevated it to custodial level.
One thing that I think will get him into trouble is he said he 'didn't want to make them into criminals.' Well, newsflash, they had already made themselves into highly dangerous criminals, so that ship had sailed. What I think he meant was that sending them to prison would launch them on a further life of crime when they came out which may be true but sometimes is unavoidable.
The really exciting accusation (although vehemently denied) is that said persons unknown are accused of organising this conspiracy at a breakfast meeting at the house of one Angela Rayner.
The accusations are rather curiously specific, and I very much hope are investigated properly, and in such a manner that charges can be brought against anyone guilty of wrongdoing. Sadly, prior attempts (or more precisely, prior failure) to investigate what has in the past appeared to be rather more blatant electoral fraud (cough, Tower Hamlets, cough) hold out little hope on this point.
Leaving this case to one side, perhaps we should look around the world for justice and prison systems that work and copy those.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=db6KtSIVBM8
Yesterday's German Cup Final in 7 minutes, including a hat trick from arguably the best player in the world.
Speaking as somebody who has many years' experience of working with adolescents, that is an exceptionally dumb message to send on all levels. Too many teenage boys will be hearing that and drawing their own conclusions.
So instead we tinker at the edges creating those awful cliff edges because it's the slightly less painful of 2 options (it more severely impacts those impacted but impacts few people and hey the people impacted are wealthy so the people who have been spared are happy to see those impacted pay even more tax).
Big abscess isn’t exactly fun, but the timing was perfect. Started Wednesday night after flying back into the UK. Home Thursday and face swelled like a bad thing, dentist Friday. Unpleasant. 5 days of antibiotics. And then away again for 3 days. So it could have been worse!
Does he recognise the line ?
Oddly, though, they deride them both as "civil war parties" when, of course, they were also part of the civil war, Fianna Fail not splitting from Sinn Fein until after the civil war, when Dev decided to take the oath to the British King while saying he didn't mean it.
\Has anyone any idea what would have happened to these lads in Norway?
An ongoing overtly 'nationalist' party in Scotland post independence would be your version of one of these 'great again' outfits that are stinking up the place wherever you look, attracting people of similar bent.
It would poll whatever it polled but it wouldn't be the same voters who support the SNP today. No doubt a few but not the mass of them. Certainly not you I think I can risk a pound saying.
I guess the pool to fish in (for MSGA) would be the Alba/Reform space.
Still, cross that bridge eh.
It still has the clickety-clack effect (i.e. the rails haven't been continuously welded) so it's both warmly nostalgic and soporific.
Hope you make a swift recovery.
Not looking good for the Hammers.
I'll give you a clue, I took it this afternoon during a walk along a canal.
DL actually split from the Workers' Party in 1992, descendants of Official Sinn Fein, who, of course split from the Provos in 1970.
I did walk along the canal in Skipton many years ago.
https://x.com/ziayusufuk/status/2058471920106951051
It’s time to stop PUNISHING people who work the hardest and drowning them in taxes like the Tory Labour uniparty.
A Reform government will ABOLISH INCOME TAX on overtime pay.
Britain was built on the hard labour of people who go the extra mile.
Thank you!
France, Germany, Spain, Italy, Poland and many other EU countries are all capable of building infrastructure at a fraction of the cost we do in the UK.
Something other than EU membership hampers our ability to invest in this country!!!
Yes it's just outside Hebden.
It’s not clear to me whether the relegation of the Tories into the Lib-Dems of the Right will hold long term. But if it does the Tories becoming an essentially southern, upper middle class, free market party will soften their stance down from the hardest of Brexits only over time. Already some 40% of their voters polled said they’d vote Rejoin in a referendum.
https://x.com/b_judah/status/2058451267316281511
AKA - cheating!
If you want us to become more efficient and effictive at spending money you have a constant, reliable, guarenteed long term stream of cash, do not turn it on and off.
HS2 is a great example of a hugely complex scheme which we simply did not have the skills for in the country.
In 10 years we will, we should already be planning what to do next, making use of those skills to do it more effectively and miles cheaper.
Nothing wahtsoever to do with the EU.
End of days.
https://x.com/BylineTimes/status/2058504286460420470?s=20
Reform candidate leans heavily anti-immigration and tweets at the likes of Dapper Laughs and Dan Wooton isn't exactly even takes £5 million off a crypto billionaire.
If we wish to prevent future bat tunnels, we need to remove the retained law, and remove Natural England's legal right to enforce such laws without reference to Ministers. Doing so would mean we would no longer be aligned with EU species regulations, and make the prospect of rejoining harder and less attractive. But it is becoming increasingly difficult to argue that we should keep the country in a Miss Havisham-like state of being ready to marry the EU in the future, when their laws are serving our needs so poorly.
The RAF’s Training Crisis: Hawk Failures, Red Arrows Struggles, and the AJT Decision
https://x.com/MtarfaL/status/2058569667682218426
.. 25/25 The upcoming AJT decision represents a critical opportunity. Choosing the right platform, paired with innovative use of assets like a re-roled Red Arrows element, could begin reversing decline. Britain once led the world in advanced training aircraft. Reclaiming credibility demands stable funding, honest requirements, and genuine long-term commitment. The coming months will show whether those lessons have finally been learned...
I'd choose whoever is prepared to offer the best offsets between the Koreans and the Italians (the latter's GCAP commitment is also worth considering).
And for 'effs sake, don't let the RAF try to gold plate whichever solution we pick.
The Tyneside spelling is Howay.
I pronounce it closer to "How-Air".