politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Time to have a dabble on Tristram Hunt at 33-1 for next LAB leader
Hunt came to public prominence as a TV historian. He’s telegenic and, as you’d expect a good communicator. He was promoted to the shadow cabinet by Ed Miliband in the reshuffle two weeks ago to take on Michael Gove.
Tristram's handy if Ed Miliband loses Labour's love The Shadow Education Secretary has had such a good week that the party may have shifted on its axis
"One Labour frontbencher told me that Ed Miliband had promoted the "telegenic" Hunt as a way of building up a rival to Chuka Umunna. If so, it worked about as well as making Stalin general secretary of the Communist Party as a counterbalance to Trotsky. "
That said, one good week does not a new leader make - and I wonder if Labour really want to put a Public school Oxbridge graduate up against a Public school Oxbridge graduate....
Hunt is clearly a rising star, and David Cameron was Shadow Education Secretary, so Hunt is certainly in a post from which he can make his name, but when will the vacancy arise? If Labour wins or is largest party in 2015 then Miliband will be PM until 2020 at least.
*checks the calendar* This is a joke right? A sly dig at that paucity of talent in the Labour party? One week where, according to Rentoul, he wasn't very good but didn't make a mistake and he is a contender for leader?
I mean, I know the bar isn't very high and there must be a desperation to find someone not tainted with the Brown stuff but really?
RT @FXMC1957: 21 October 1975. Britain's unemployment figure reached 1 Million for the first time since World War 2.
I remember that. There were serious discussions about whether society could hold together under the strain, whether social cohesion would collapse and whether there would be riots. Now getting unemployment down under 2.5m is an achievement, apparently.
I also remember Nigel Lawson in the late 1980s saying that unemployment was not an economic issue, in that the country could afford the benefits (those were the days), it was a moral issue. Was it acceptable that so many of our fellow citizens were being denied the fruits of work? He was right, as usual.
RT @FXMC1957: 21 October 1975. Britain's unemployment figure reached 1 Million for the first time since World War 2.
I remember that. There were serious discussions about whether society could hold together under the strain, whether social cohesion would collapse and whether there would be riots. Now getting unemployment down under 2.5m is an achievement, apparently.
I also remember Nigel Lawson in the late 1980s saying that unemployment was not an economic issue, in that the country could afford the benefits (those were the days), it was a moral issue. Was it acceptable that so many of our fellow citizens were being denied the fruits of work? He was right, as usual.
I dimly remember it being all over the papers, what was the population here back then 50m ish?
Hunt is clearly a rising star, and David Cameron was Shadow Education Secretary, so Hunt is certainly in a post from which he can make his name, but when will the vacancy arise? If Labour wins or is largest party in 2015 then Miliband will be PM until 2020 at least.
And that's a fair point but 33/1 was still an excellent set of odds. Hunt is only likely to become leader in opposition; beauty contests don't count for as much In government. As such, we probably are looking at 2020 or later for this bet to come in. The Labour Party would also need to be ready for another presentation-heavy leader and I think there's still caution on the part of many there, after what happened with the last one (yeah, three election wins but it turned out he was a NeoCon).
Still, there are usually excellent odds to be had on the person who becomes the next leader if you can identify them far enough out. Brown was a rare exception. Mike's right to have a punt on a possible. There's every possibility that Hunt may become another name on the long list of might-have-beens, but there's also the chance he won't and I do think he has value there.
RT @FXMC1957: 21 October 1975. Britain's unemployment figure reached 1 Million for the first time since World War 2.
I remember that. There were serious discussions about whether society could hold together under the strain, whether social cohesion would collapse and whether there would be riots. Now getting unemployment down under 2.5m is an achievement, apparently.
I also remember Nigel Lawson in the late 1980s saying that unemployment was not an economic issue, in that the country could afford the benefits (those were the days), it was a moral issue. Was it acceptable that so many of our fellow citizens were being denied the fruits of work? He was right, as usual.
I dimly remember it being all over the papers, what was the population here back then 50m ish?
According to the Secretary of State for Energy an Climate Change, '[f]or the first time, a nuclear power station in this country will not have been built with money from the British taxpayer.' (Per Press Release on Hinkley Point C) So what exactly is a stake price of £92.50/MWh (linked to Consumer Prices Inflation), if it is not money from the British taxpayer? The government treats the public like fools.
It will be at least a couple of decades before we know whether we got a good or a bad price for Hinkley Point. Long enough for Davey and the rest of this government to be safely off the scene.
What we know right now is that there is an assurance of base supply for large industrial users in the UK, that that will not be cheap energy but it may not be expensive either depending upon what happens in other markets over time, that we have another major infrastructure project up and running and that a decision that ought to have been made more than 10 years ago has finally been made.
"I mean, I know the bar isn't very high and there must be a desperation to find someone not tainted with the Brown stuff but really?"
Actually you're being unfair. He has every quality needed to be a leader in the X Factor age. He's better looking than Dave. Cleverer than Dave. More articulate as Dave. Without the Bullingdon baggage of Dave. Not OTT plummy like Dave.
But most important he's Labour. He chose his own way. He didn't just get in line behind every Etonian toff before him into the Tory Party. The British have always preferred someone who zigs when then the rest of the herd zags. Something no one can suggest Dave has done
It will be at least a couple of decades before we know whether we got a good or a bad price for Hinkley Point. Long enough for Davey and the rest of this government to be safely off the scene.
What we know right now is that there is an assurance of base supply for large industrial users in the UK, that that will not be cheap energy but it may not be expensive either depending upon what happens in other markets over time, that we have another major infrastructure project up and running and that a decision that ought to have been made more than 10 years ago has finally been made.
But most important he's Labour. He chose his own way.
Really?
"Hunt is the son of Julian Hunt, a meteorologist and leader of the Labour Group on Cambridge City Council in 1972-3, who was created a Labour Life Peer on the recommendation of Tony Blair in 2000."
"I mean, I know the bar isn't very high and there must be a desperation to find someone not tainted with the Brown stuff but really?"
Actually you're being unfair. He has every quality needed to be a leader in the X Factor age. He's better looking than Dave. Cleverer than Dave. More articulate as Dave. Without the Bullingdon baggage of Dave. Not OTT plummy like Dave.
But most important he's Labour. He chose his own way. He didn't just get in line behind every Etonian toff before him into the Tory Party. The British have always preferred someone who zigs when then the rest of the herd zags. Something no one can suggest Dave has done
Hunt looks like a blond Mitt Romney. Rather ridiculous and plastic.
According to the Secretary of State for Energy an Climate Change, '[f]or the first time, a nuclear power station in this country will not have been built with money from the British taxpayer.' (Per Press Release on Hinkley Point C) So what exactly is a stake price of £92.50/MWh (linked to Consumer Prices Inflation), if it is not money from the British taxpayer? The government treats the public like fools.
LOL
Osborne thinks the British energy consumer transferring resources at a fixed price to the Chinese Communist Party is an example of free enterprise. As with East Coast Rail and the Royal Mail, any govt can own a chunk of the UK as long at its not the UK govt.
tim
China has foreign exchange reserves of $3.5 trillion and averages around $20 billion dollars trade surplus a month.
The UK has foreign exchange reserves of $106 billion, around 3% of China's, and has run an average trade deficit of £1.2 billion per month for the past sixty years.
China has the technology, experience, financial resources and will to set up a nuclear power station in the UK?
Pray tell me, Sir, how Labour would finance such a project in lieu of direct Chinese investment.
It is my understanding that it would be difficult to generate nuclear power from a spare room on a housing benefit subsidy
That's a pol about Chinese tourists and business visitors, what has it got to do with guaranteeing the investments of the Communist Party?
You don't read the polls:
"China tops the list of regions that the UK should forge closer trading partnerships with (53%), somewhat ahead of Europe (35%), Australia and New Zealand (34%) and North America (33%)."
If Hunt the Historian became leader of Labour, could we please have Dan Snow as leader of the Liberal Democrats and Niall Ferguson as leader of the Conservatives?
Political speeches could become more interesting with well-spoken history experts at the top.
Even more worrying than giving a totalitarian government a fundamental role in developing our energy infrastructure is the idea of giving its banks full access to the City.
The government is absolutely right to see the enormous opportunities there are in trading with Chia, but it does seem to be very wide eyed about it, as opposed to open eyed. I think we were very badly stung by Dave's meeting with the Dalai Lama. That really pissed the Chinese off and so now to get back in the good books we have had to make more compromises than would otherwise have been the case.
Even more worrying than giving a totalitarian government a fundamental role in developing our energy infrastructure is the idea of giving its banks full access to the City.
The government is absolutely right to see the enormous opportunities there are in trading with Chia, but it does seem to be very wide eyed about it, as opposed to open eyed. I think we were very badly stung by Dave's meeting with the Dalai Lama. That really pissed the Chinese off and so now to get back in the good books we have had to make more compromises than would otherwise have been the case.
Do you think it was wrong for Dave to meet the Dalai Lama?
"I mean, I know the bar isn't very high and there must be a desperation to find someone not tainted with the Brown stuff but really?"
Actually you're being unfair. He has every quality needed to be a leader in the X Factor age. He's better looking than Dave. Cleverer than Dave. More articulate as Dave. Without the Bullingdon baggage of Dave. Not OTT plummy like Dave.
But most important he's Labour. He chose his own way. He didn't just get in line behind every Etonian toff before him into the Tory Party. The British have always preferred someone who zigs when then the rest of the herd zags. Something no one can suggest Dave has done
But he is called Tristram. It's a ruddy awful name, even leaving aside the class overtones, because the second "r" makes it absurdly difficult to pronounce for a first name.
He's got the Hugh Grant open-necked shirt look quite comfortably though. That won't do him any harm among the all-important 45-65 female demographic.
"Cameron Says China Uncertainty Requires U.K. to Maintain Nuclear Deterrent"
“Are we really happy to say that we’d give up our independent nuclear deterrent when we don’t know what is going to happen with Iran, we can’t be certain of the future in China?”
Even more worrying than giving a totalitarian government a fundamental role in developing our energy infrastructure is the idea of giving its banks full access to the City.
The government is absolutely right to see the enormous opportunities there are in trading with Chia, but it does seem to be very wide eyed about it, as opposed to open eyed. I think we were very badly stung by Dave's meeting with the Dalai Lama. That really pissed the Chinese off and so now to get back in the good books we have had to make more compromises than would otherwise have been the case.
Do you think it was wrong for Dave to meet the Dalai Lama?
From the perspective of UK national interest it undoubtedly was. We are not the US. We can't just get away with these things. Given the Chinese are instinctively anti-British anyway it was spectacularly ill-advised.
Moderately amused and entirely unsurprised that a evil Tory toff!!! chap with a privileged background is seen as good because he's in Labour, whereas if he were in the Conservatives he'd be seen in quite a different light.
Done most of the early discussion piece for India, and I'll try and get that up fairly shortly.
If we can buy oil from Saudi Arabia and gas from Russia, why on earth should we not be buying nuclear energy generation capability from China?
I'm all in favour of new nuclear, but given the public safety track record of Chinese officials, there might be some concern that any safety data from Chinese built and operated reactors might rival Tepco for transparency
Being newish to PB I understandthere may be some widget to filter out specific posters who you may find for example repetitive, snide and ungracious. Can someone point me in the right direction. Thanks
Even more worrying than giving a totalitarian government a fundamental role in developing our energy infrastructure...
As I understand it, all the Chinese are giving us is a large wodge of cash. It's the French who will be directly involved in building the things.
It's pretty embarrassing that we can have a huge frenzy of excitement about making a quick profit on the sale of Royal Mail shares, but we can't find the money to fund investment in our energy infrastructure. Instead we will be sending money overseas for decades.
Even more worrying than giving a totalitarian government a fundamental role in developing our energy infrastructure is the idea of giving its banks full access to the City.
The government is absolutely right to see the enormous opportunities there are in trading with Chia, but it does seem to be very wide eyed about it, as opposed to open eyed. I think we were very badly stung by Dave's meeting with the Dalai Lama. That really pissed the Chinese off and so now to get back in the good books we have had to make more compromises than would otherwise have been the case.
Do you think it was wrong for Dave to meet the Dalai Lama?
From the perspective of UK national interest it undoubtedly was. We are not the US. We can't just get away with these things. Given the Chinese are instinctively anti-British anyway it was spectacularly ill-advised.
Harry Pollitt would be proud of you, wouldn't he, tim?
If we can buy oil from Saudi Arabia and gas from Russia, why on earth should we not be buying nuclear energy generation capability from China?
I'm all in favour of new nuclear, but given the public safety track record of Chinese officials, there might be some concern that any safety data from Chinese built and operated reactors might rival Tepco for transparency
But it will be built to UK safety standards under UK supervision.
Councillor Jobsworth will be seconded from the Lib Dems to supervise installation once he has completed his training and been awarded a suitable qualification.
If we can buy oil from Saudi Arabia and gas from Russia, why on earth should we not be buying nuclear energy generation capability from China?
I very much hope that our government can see the difference between private companies buying oil from the Saudis and the British taxpayer underpinning the creation of a nuclear power plant in the heart of England.
So far the jury is out on Dr (You know I'm a Cambridge PhD) The Honourable Tristram Hunt.
His first round of media interviews on appointment were promising but his HoC Emergency Question last week was a mare. Barely half an hour long, badly attended by the Labour benches and comfortably bested by David Laws.
Fortunately for the good Dr Hunt the Coalition has thrown him a juicy bone with their dissent over free schools.
Being newish to PB I understandthere may be some widget to filter out specific posters who you may find for example repetitive, snide and ungracious. Can someone point me in the right direction. Thanks
What a wonderful and incisive addition to PB you look set to be. Can you make sure you filter me out? Cheers.
His first round of media interviews on appointment were promising but his HoC Emergency Question last week was a mare. Barely half an hour long, badly attended by the Labour benches and comfortably bested by David Laws.
Yes, I got the impression he hadn't done his homework and thought he could rely on TV soundbites.....lets see whether he learns for his next outing......
And forgive me if I remain a sceptic of Will Hutton's analysis:
"If only Britain had joined the euro If Gordon Brown had chosen to join the single currency 10 years ago, both the European Union and Britain would be stronger now"
Note that Britain long ago fell out with Blair clones as prospective PMs and is seeking an older, wiser, more experienced-outside-politics person who (preferably) has a science/engineering degree.
In his favour, he was not, AFAIK, a SPAD and his degree is not an Oxford PPE one.
So why, pray, is he not addressed as 'Doctor Hunt' by interviewers? The choice is not his to make............
Quite an 'ethical bank' thats facing a further £100 million for PPI mis-selling......
"Co-op Bank is also expected to announce later today that its provisions for the costs of compensating customers for mis-selling PPI insurance or for flaws in lending documentation, inter alia, will be around £100m greater than it expected."
Being newish to PB I understandthere may be some widget to filter out specific posters who you may find for example repetitive, snide and ungracious. Can someone point me in the right direction. Thanks
According to the Secretary of State for Energy an Climate Change, '[f]or the first time, a nuclear power station in this country will not have been built with money from the British taxpayer.' (Per Press Release on Hinkley Point C) So what exactly is a stake price of £92.50/MWh (linked to Consumer Prices Inflation), if it is not money from the British taxpayer? The government treats the public like fools.
LIAMT : You are nearly correct. They are total fools and stupid enough to think above is real and in reality do not care a jot about the public , but think they are so smart they will keep the public on board.
If we can buy oil from Saudi Arabia and gas from Russia, why on earth should we not be buying nuclear energy generation capability from China?
I'm all in favour of new nuclear, but given the public safety track record of Chinese officials, there might be some concern that any safety data from Chinese built and operated reactors might rival Tepco for transparency
All the Chinese are providing is cheap financing. The reactors will be managed by EDF, the (largely state owned) French electricity giant, who has a pretty good safety record. The reactors are based on the Areva (also French) EPR design.
Two EPR reactors are currently under construction in Europe (one at Flamanville in France, the other in Finland). Both have blown out their budgets (current cost estimates of $11bn, against a budget of around $4bn a piece), and are massively late (in service dates of 2015/16 against plans of 2008). I hope the contract we have is such that we - the taxpayers - will not be paying if these reactors are late and/or over-budget.
The central question about Chinese investment in British infrastructure is whether it is value for money for Britain. As a Chinese man once said:
"It doesn't matter whether it's a white cat or a black, I think; a cat that catches mice is a good cat."
It's quite funny to see some of the people who praised Boris Johnson's article last night showing low level xenophobia this morning.
What's xenophobic about having concerns that laying out the red carpet for a totalitarian regime is not necessarily in our long term national interest? Given the inherent uncertainty surrounding such forms of government and their rejection of concepts such as an independent judiciary, freedom of movement, thought and capital, what looks a good deal now may well look very different in a few years' time - especially as we do have an independent judiciary. Statements that GO has made over the last week seem to indicate he may not have the clearest and most forensic understanding of how China functions. But, then again, if the government did have a proper appreciation of the Communist Party regime there is no way Dave would have met the Dalai Lama.
Note that Britain long ago fell out with Blair clones as prospective PMs and is seeking an older, wiser, more experienced-outside-politics person who (preferably) has a science/engineering degree.
In his favour, he was not, AFAIK, a SPAD and his degree is not an Oxford PPE one.
So why, pray, is he not addressed as 'Doctor Hunt' by interviewers? The choice is not his to make............
As the son of a Baron he is Dr The Honourable Tristram Hunt.
RT @FXMC1957: 21 October 1975. Britain's unemployment figure reached 1 Million for the first time since World War 2.
Tories, erasing their bloopers from history since, well, forever really..
'1972: UK unemployment tops one million The number of people out of work and claiming benefit has risen above one million for the first time since the 1930s. There were angry demonstrations in the House of Commons when the jobless total was confirmed as 1,023,583.'
Even more worrying than giving a totalitarian government a fundamental role in developing our energy infrastructure...
As I understand it, all the Chinese are giving us is a large wodge of cash. It's the French who will be directly involved in building the things.
It's pretty embarrassing that we can have a huge frenzy of excitement about making a quick profit on the sale of Royal Mail shares, but we can't find the money to fund investment in our energy infrastructure. Instead we will be sending money overseas for decades.
You could not make it up , the Tory genius, give all our money to the Chinese for 35 years and in return they will give a wedge of it to our French friends to build a monstrosity and milk the public, whilst some chums will no doubt grace the boardrooms of all involved. Makes Brown's PFI look clever and a bargain.
The central question about Chinese investment in British infrastructure is whether it is value for money for Britain. As a Chinese man once said:
"It doesn't matter whether it's a white cat or a black, I think; a cat that catches mice is a good cat."
It's quite funny to see some of the people who praised Boris Johnson's article last night showing low level xenophobia this morning.
What's xenophobic about having concerns that laying out the red carpet for a totalitarian regime is not necessarily in our long term national interest? Given the inherent uncertainty surrounding such forms of government and their rejection of concepts such as an independent judiciary, freedom of movement, thought and capital, what looks a good deal now may well look very different in a few years' time - especially as we do have an independent judiciary. Statements that GO has made over the last week seem to indicate he may not have the clearest and most forensic understanding of how China functions. But, then again, if the government did have a proper appreciation of the Communist Party regime there is no way Dave would have met the Dalai Lama.
SO: you can rest easy, all China is providing is a cheque.
Mr. Observer, there may well be legitimate criticisms about Chinese engagement. However, on energy, Labour had 13 years and spent most of that time making energy more expensive instead of actually building any power stations. There wouldn't be such an urgent need for new stations if Labour hadn't dicked about.
It's good to see some new stations will be built shortly [in relative terms].
It'd be nice if we increased gas reserves so we could last longer than a week if supplies were cut off, though...
You mean Dr the Honourable Tristram Julian William Hunt MP, the privately-schooled, Cambridge-educated son of Lord Hunt?
Do it, Labour. Do it. The Tories should then elect a CDE state-schooled woman to lead them against Labour. The result would be a Conservative landslide.
If we can buy oil from Saudi Arabia and gas from Russia, why on earth should we not be buying nuclear energy generation capability from China?
I'm all in favour of new nuclear, but given the public safety track record of Chinese officials, there might be some concern that any safety data from Chinese built and operated reactors might rival Tepco for transparency
All the Chinese are providing is cheap financing. The reactors will be managed by EDF, the (largely state owned) French electricity giant, who has a pretty good safety record. The reactors are based on the Areva (also French) EPR design.
Two EPR reactors are currently under construction in Europe (one at Flamanville in France, the other in Finland). Both have blown out their budgets (current cost estimates of $11bn, against a budget of around $4bn a piece), and are massively late (in service dates of 2015/16 against plans of 2008). I hope the contract we have is such that we - the taxpayers - will not be paying if these reactors are late and/or over-budget.
I stand corrected, thanks.
Taxpayers are always on the hook for nuclear in the end, esp wrt decommissioning. On the other hand, that underwriting may well be necessary to keep the lights on
Being newish to PB I understandthere may be some widget to filter out specific posters who you may find for example repetitive, snide and ungracious. Can someone point me in the right direction. Thanks
Check out the sidebar for Edmund in Tokyo's widget - it may be called EiT - it enables you to Favourite or Ignore posters. It's great.
Being newish to PB I understandthere may be some widget to filter out specific posters who you may find for example repetitive, snide and ungracious. Can someone point me in the right direction. Thanks
Check out the sidebar for Edmund in Tokyo's widget - it may be called EiT - it enables you to Favourite or Ignore posters. It's great.
Yes wonderful if you only want to see your own bigoted point of view. Why bother coming on teh site if you don't want to hear a range of opinions.
Unfortunately according to present rules should in time Hunt be sworn of the Privy Council, become a medical doctor, be awarded an honorary doctorate and then accept a life peerage he wouldn't be :
Dr, Dr, Dr The Right Honourable, Right Honourable, Honourable Tristram Hunt
Mr. Observer, there may well be legitimate criticisms about Chinese engagement. However, on energy, Labour had 13 years and spent most of that time making energy more expensive instead of actually building any power stations. There wouldn't be such an urgent need for new stations if Labour hadn't dicked about.
It's good to see some new stations will be built shortly [in relative terms].
It'd be nice if we increased gas reserves so we could last longer than a week if supplies were cut off, though...
I am not defending Labour's record on energy. That is indefensible. I am questioning the current government's engagement with the Chinese Communist Party. I think the bottom line is that Dave's meeting with the Dalai Lama was one very costly photo opportunity.
"But he is called Tristram. It's a ruddy awful name, even leaving aside the class overtones, because the second "r" makes it absurdly difficult to pronounce for a first name."
It's the ultimate test for the electorate. Can they get their tongue round 'Tristram' or as antifrank suggests must they be fed a diet of Nick Dave Ed and Colin?
The central question about Chinese investment in British infrastructure is whether it is value for money for Britain. As a Chinese man once said:
"It doesn't matter whether it's a white cat or a black, I think; a cat that catches mice is a good cat."
It's quite funny to see some of the people who praised Boris Johnson's article last night showing low level xenophobia this morning.
What's xenophobic about having concerns that laying out the red carpet for a totalitarian regime is not necessarily in our long term national interest? Given the inherent uncertainty surrounding such forms of government and their rejection of concepts such as an independent judiciary, freedom of movement, thought and capital, what looks a good deal now may well look very different in a few years' time - especially as we do have an independent judiciary. Statements that GO has made over the last week seem to indicate he may not have the clearest and most forensic understanding of how China functions. But, then again, if the government did have a proper appreciation of the Communist Party regime there is no way Dave would have met the Dalai Lama.
Money has no odour. We can turn our back on China on the basis that we don't like its government, but that would be remarkably foolish given the size of its economy and its rapid growth. Or we can try to get a piece of the action. I'm in favour of trying to get a piece of the action.
You can hardly present yourself as principled if you think that David Cameron shouldn't have met the Dalai Lama because it might upset the Chinese government.
The central question about Chinese investment in British infrastructure is whether it is value for money for Britain. As a Chinese man once said:
"It doesn't matter whether it's a white cat or a black, I think; a cat that catches mice is a good cat."
It's quite funny to see some of the people who praised Boris Johnson's article last night showing low level xenophobia this morning.
What's xenophobic about having concerns that laying out the red carpet for a totalitarian regime is not necessarily in our long term national interest? Given the inherent uncertainty surrounding such forms of government and their rejection of concepts such as an independent judiciary, freedom of movement, thought and capital, what looks a good deal now may well look very different in a few years' time - especially as we do have an independent judiciary. Statements that GO has made over the last week seem to indicate he may not have the clearest and most forensic understanding of how China functions. But, then again, if the government did have a proper appreciation of the Communist Party regime there is no way Dave would have met the Dalai Lama.
SO: you can rest easy, all China is providing is a cheque.
As I say downthread the bigger concern for me is the access to the City.
Comments
Tristram's handy if Ed Miliband loses Labour's love
The Shadow Education Secretary has had such a good week that the party may have shifted on its axis
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/tristrams-handy-if-ed-miliband-loses-labours-love-8891653.html
And a dig at Ed:
"One Labour frontbencher told me that Ed Miliband had promoted the "telegenic" Hunt as a way of building up a rival to Chuka Umunna. If so, it worked about as well as making Stalin general secretary of the Communist Party as a counterbalance to Trotsky. "
That said, one good week does not a new leader make - and I wonder if Labour really want to put a Public school Oxbridge graduate up against a Public school Oxbridge graduate....
Even so, I doubt 33/1 will last long....
I can only think of one other in the Labour Party.
I put it all down to telegenetics.
I mean, I know the bar isn't very high and there must be a desperation to find someone not tainted with the Brown stuff but really?
I also remember Nigel Lawson in the late 1980s saying that unemployment was not an economic issue, in that the country could afford the benefits (those were the days), it was a moral issue. Was it acceptable that so many of our fellow citizens were being denied the fruits of work? He was right, as usual.
Doesn't stand a chance
BBC News - Brighton Green leader Kitcat blames 'ill-discipline' for poll slump bbc.in/1aySxKt
Still, there are usually excellent odds to be had on the person who becomes the next leader if you can identify them far enough out. Brown was a rare exception. Mike's right to have a punt on a possible. There's every possibility that Hunt may become another name on the long list of might-have-beens, but there's also the chance he won't and I do think he has value there.
"Tristram's handy if Ed Miliband loses Labour's love"
I suppose he's saving 'Love Labour's Lost' for a defection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom
Never stopped me.
25,000 jobs to be created through building of new nuclear power station at #hinkley say Govt
norman smith @BBCNormanS
Govt say #EDF will be responsible for decommissioning costs at #Hinkley Point and share of costs of waste management
Is Davey setting up the big Lib Dem policy success in energy come 2015.
I agree that there is a major talent shortage on the front bench, but talent for TV is not the only requirement.
chortle...!
What we know right now is that there is an assurance of base supply for large industrial users in the UK, that that will not be cheap energy but it may not be expensive either depending upon what happens in other markets over time, that we have another major infrastructure project up and running and that a decision that ought to have been made more than 10 years ago has finally been made.
The deal is clearly complex but does allow some clawback if costs undershoot (wouldn't bank on that George) and a reduction in the strike price if they agree to develop a second site: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10392510/Hinkley-Point-good-for-Britain-says-Ed-Davey.html
As I say way too early to tell but at least we are getting on with it at last.
"I mean, I know the bar isn't very high and there must be a desperation to find someone not tainted with the Brown stuff but really?"
Actually you're being unfair. He has every quality needed to be a leader in the X Factor age. He's better looking than Dave. Cleverer than Dave. More articulate as Dave. Without the Bullingdon baggage of Dave. Not OTT plummy like Dave.
But most important he's Labour. He chose his own way. He didn't just get in line behind every Etonian toff before him into the Tory Party. The British have always preferred someone who zigs when then the rest of the herd zags. Something no one can suggest Dave has done
"BRITS WELCOME CHINESE WITH OPEN ARMS"
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/10/17/china-most-important-trade-partner/
As PFI deals go, it is a good one.
"Hunt is the son of Julian Hunt, a meteorologist and leader of the Labour Group on Cambridge City Council in 1972-3, who was created a Labour Life Peer on the recommendation of Tony Blair in 2000."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tristram_Hunt
If he was the son of a Tory politician your argument might have more validity........
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7194864.stm
Whilst promising that Uk will buy Chinese consumer goods.
Pre Labour's bust mind you...
China has foreign exchange reserves of $3.5 trillion and averages around $20 billion dollars trade surplus a month.
The UK has foreign exchange reserves of $106 billion, around 3% of China's, and has run an average trade deficit of £1.2 billion per month for the past sixty years.
China has the technology, experience, financial resources and will to set up a nuclear power station in the UK?
Pray tell me, Sir, how Labour would finance such a project in lieu of direct Chinese investment.
It is my understanding that it would be difficult to generate nuclear power from a spare room on a housing benefit subsidy
"China tops the list of regions that the UK should forge closer trading partnerships with (53%), somewhat ahead of Europe (35%), Australia and New Zealand (34%) and North America (33%)."
If Hunt the Historian became leader of Labour, could we please have Dan Snow as leader of the Liberal Democrats and Niall Ferguson as leader of the Conservatives?
Political speeches could become more interesting with well-spoken history experts at the top.
"Hunt looks like a blond Mitt Romney. Rather ridiculous and plastic"
It's buy one get one free at Specsavers this week.
The government is absolutely right to see the enormous opportunities there are in trading with Chia, but it does seem to be very wide eyed about it, as opposed to open eyed. I think we were very badly stung by Dave's meeting with the Dalai Lama. That really pissed the Chinese off and so now to get back in the good books we have had to make more compromises than would otherwise have been the case.
He's got the Hugh Grant open-necked shirt look quite comfortably though. That won't do him any harm among the all-important 45-65 female demographic.
If we can buy oil from Saudi Arabia and gas from Russia, why on earth should we not be buying nuclear energy generation capability from China?
It's a funny old world, tim's-world......
Moderately amused and entirely unsurprised that a evil Tory toff!!! chap with a privileged background is seen as good because he's in Labour, whereas if he were in the Conservatives he'd be seen in quite a different light.
Done most of the early discussion piece for India, and I'll try and get that up fairly shortly.
It's pretty embarrassing that we can have a huge frenzy of excitement about making a quick profit on the sale of Royal Mail shares, but we can't find the money to fund investment in our energy infrastructure. Instead we will be sending money overseas for decades.
Councillor Jobsworth will be seconded from the Lib Dems to supervise installation once he has completed his training and been awarded a suitable qualification.
His first round of media interviews on appointment were promising but his HoC Emergency Question last week was a mare. Barely half an hour long, badly attended by the Labour benches and comfortably bested by David Laws.
Fortunately for the good Dr Hunt the Coalition has thrown him a juicy bone with their dissent over free schools.
Perhaps he'll be a lucky general.
I would put money on Kwasi Kwarteng to be the first of my university set to make it to either the cabinet or the leadership of a political party.
And forgive me if I remain a sceptic of Will Hutton's analysis:
"If only Britain had joined the euro
If Gordon Brown had chosen to join the single currency 10 years ago, both the European Union and Britain would be stronger now"
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/13/if-britain-had-joined-the-euro
"It doesn't matter whether it's a white cat or a black, I think; a cat that catches mice is a good cat."
It's quite funny to see some of the people who praised Boris Johnson's article last night showing low level xenophobia this morning.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24605864
I think you have found the chink in SO's arbour.
Hunt = Blair.
Note that Britain long ago fell out with Blair clones as prospective PMs and is seeking an older, wiser, more experienced-outside-politics person who (preferably) has a science/engineering degree.
In his favour, he was not, AFAIK, a SPAD and his degree is not an Oxford PPE one.
So why, pray, is he not addressed as 'Doctor Hunt' by interviewers? The choice is not his to make............
"Co-op Bank is also expected to announce later today that its provisions for the costs of compensating customers for mis-selling PPI insurance or for flaws in lending documentation, inter alia, will be around £100m greater than it expected."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24605864
I wonder if holders of big over drafts at the COOP should worry about regime change?
Or are you indicating that only Labour should be economically rimming the Gulf states ??
what exactly is it about the Chinese that you don't like, tim?
You remind me of the 2012 Republicans.
Two EPR reactors are currently under construction in Europe (one at Flamanville in France, the other in Finland). Both have blown out their budgets (current cost estimates of $11bn, against a budget of around $4bn a piece), and are massively late (in service dates of 2015/16 against plans of 2008). I hope the contract we have is such that we - the taxpayers - will not be paying if these reactors are late and/or over-budget.
'1972: UK unemployment tops one million
The number of people out of work and claiming benefit has risen above one million for the first time since the 1930s.
There were angry demonstrations in the House of Commons when the jobless total was confirmed as 1,023,583.'
http://tinyurl.com/y8r77tf
Makes Brown's PFI look clever and a bargain.
As for those snide comments about those beloved communists, well he might as well be channeling Mitt.
It's good to see some new stations will be built shortly [in relative terms].
It'd be nice if we increased gas reserves so we could last longer than a week if supplies were cut off, though...
Taxpayers are always on the hook for nuclear in the end, esp wrt decommissioning. On the other hand, that underwriting may well be necessary to keep the lights on
Dr, Dr, Dr The Right Honourable, Right Honourable, Honourable Tristram Hunt
"But he is called Tristram. It's a ruddy awful name, even leaving aside the class overtones, because the second "r" makes it absurdly difficult to pronounce for a first name."
It's the ultimate test for the electorate. Can they get their tongue round 'Tristram' or as antifrank suggests must they be fed a diet of Nick Dave Ed and Colin?
You can hardly present yourself as principled if you think that David Cameron shouldn't have met the Dalai Lama because it might upset the Chinese government.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2467597/You-chateau-bottled-nuclear-powered----Tory-grandee-Soames-launches-astonishing-tea-room-broadside-EU-referendum-rebel-Afriyie.html