Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.
Worth going?
I watched Knives Out last night with my partner which was brilliant and certainly has got better reviews than the final Star Wars instalment which seems to be worse than Last Jedi which I enjoyed.
I will still go though to wrap up the saga and while it will be OK ignore the hype, there are better movies out there at the moment
Probably not at most cinemas - which from Friday will mainly be showing Star Wars or Cats on most screens.
And the reviews for Cats are not kind - the Telegraph review is worth reading for it's cattiness.
Yes, the 2 big movies of the Christmas season Star Wars and Cats both seem overhyped while underdelivering.
I expect Knives Out will still be at Curzon cinemas, it was still on at the Odeon last night though may not be next week.
Otherwise 1917 looks interesting and might wait for that in January
Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.
Worth going?
I watched Knives Out last night with my partner which was brilliant and certainly has got better reviews than the final Star Wars instalment which seems to be worse than Last Jedi which I enjoyed.
I will still go though to wrap up the saga and while it will be OK ignore the hype, there are better movies out there at the moment
Knives Out is probably the best film I saw this year. I would certainly recommend it to anyone who likes a tightly plotted and well acted film with some great lines.
The Labour party have no money after the election - exactly how does Mr Reynolds think the labour party is going to get the money required to continue paying them?
It can find money for severance packages for Milne & Murphy if it has to...
Interesting counter argument, but wrong. Of course the Red Wall simplifies. This is politics. But the results signify a structural change. While Hull East (!) is now highly marginal, (in the 1983 wipeout Prescott had a 10000 majority) old safe Tory seats in the south, like Enfield Southgate, have stayed Labour (by 4500 votes) even in a catastrophic time for Labour (16000 Tory majority in 1983). Laura Pidcock would be electable in Putney but is not so in the old coalfields and Consett. Significant numbers of safe Labour seats in the north are marginal now - ask Yvette Cooper. Labour piles up votes in large urban, uni and BAME seats. Having lost Scotland that is not enough for now to win - not when you need to win 123 new seats to form a majority government.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Actually it’s the other way around. Go back a week and there wasn’t any such reference on the page. Over recent days someone has been trying very hard to insert that he is allegedly a millionaire into the article. Sometimes multiple times. Such that the page now has partial protection against vandalism.
Interesting, the 'millionaire' insertions have come from Dundee and Wood Green, to name but two. In fairness Starmer has been so-described in the UK press.
Being a millionaire is not nearly as difficult as it used to be, particularly when house prices in London and the value of pension pots is taken into account.
Indeed so.
But to anyone who doesn't live in London or have a massive pension pot - 90% of the country - it's still a clear indication that he is one of 'them' rather than one of 'us'.
He is not as rich as the Prime Minister and actually worked for everything he achieved. Working class aspiration and success are good things. It’s what Labour was established to enable. Sadly, too many in the party have forgotten that.
The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.
I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.
The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.
I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.
Why Nandy? Can’t see it.
I am looking for either a Kinnock or John Smith figure.
Who do you think might have the strength of character, to do to the Momentum types today what Kinnock did to the Militant types back in the 1980s?
Kinnock did what the majority of the party elected him to do. That’s why he succeeded. Labour is in a far worse position in 2019. No potential leader wanting to change things can say so before being elected. No-one wins any election by telling voters they are wrong.
The major question of this election therefore, is do the membership understand that the proposition of today's Labour party is the problem, or do they think it was Corbyn personally and the evil Tory media?
If they decide it's one more heave under someone who's not Corbyn, then we get someone like R L-B, and if they decide that they need to tack towards the more centrist floating votes then they go for someone like Starmer.
That just about sums it up. I think Long Bailey is the comfort zone candidate. And Labour members do like the comfort zone. But perhaps they are also sick of losing. The likelihood is the comfort zone prevails, but I reckon it will be close.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Actually it’s the other way around. Go back a week and there wasn’t any such reference on the page. Over recent days someone has been trying very hard to insert that he is allegedly a millionaire into the article. Sometimes multiple times. Such that the page now has partial protection against vandalism.
Interesting, the 'millionaire' insertions have come from Dundee and Wood Green, to name but two. In fairness Starmer has been so-described in the UK press.
Being a millionaire is not nearly as difficult as it used to be, particularly when house prices in London and the value of pension pots is taken into account.
Indeed so.
But to anyone who doesn't live in London or have a massive pension pot - 90% of the country - it's still a clear indication that he is one of 'them' rather than one of 'us'.
He is not as rich as the Prime Minister and actually worked for everything he achieved. Working class aspiration and success are good things. It’s what Labour was established to enable. Sadly, too many in the party have forgotten that.
Its all right to aspire to something, but in Labour think if you have attained it, you move from aspired to and admired to made it and loathed. Look at Tony Blair.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.
Worth going?
I watched Knives Out last night with my partner which was brilliant and certainly has got better reviews than the final Star Wars instalment which seems to be worse than Last Jedi which I enjoyed.
I will still go though to wrap up the saga and while it will be OK ignore the hype, there are better movies out there at the moment
Probably not at most cinemas - which from Friday will mainly be showing Star Wars or Cats on most screens.
And the reviews for Cats are not kind - the Telegraph review is worth reading for it's cattiness.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
The Tory attacks in Starmer show clearly he is the one they fear. It’s pretty transparent.
I think "fear" is pushing it somewhat, but he's the best of the bad bunch that is the Labour front bench.
The electoral system used is going to make this a difficult market to work out (hands up who got the 100/1 on Corbyn as nominations closed in 2015?), it depends much more on factional voting, union and shad cab endorsements, than strength of character or argument.
I think Starmer has a chance, but he needs a big union to fully back him if he is to have a realistic shot because of the organisational boost it would bring. Long Bailey will have the Unite and Momentum machines fully behind her, so she must be favourite. My choice would be Nandy, just as it has been for the last three years. Sadly, though, I doubt she’ll make the contest.
Why Nandy? Can’t see it.
I am looking for either a Kinnock or John Smith figure.
Who do you think might have the strength of character, to do to the Momentum types today what Kinnock did to the Militant types back in the 1980s?
Kinnock did what the majority of the party elected him to do. That’s why he succeeded. Labour is in a far worse position in 2019. No potential leader wanting to change things can say so before being elected. No-one wins any election by telling voters they are wrong.
The major question of this election therefore, is do the membership understand that the proposition of today's Labour party is the problem, or do they think it was Corbyn personally and the evil Tory media?
If they decide it's one more heave under someone who's not Corbyn, then we get someone like R L-B, and if they decide that they need to tack towards the more centrist floating votes then they go for someone like Starmer.
That just about sums it up. I think Long Bailey is the comfort zone candidate. And Labour members do like the comfort zone. But perhaps they are also sick of losing. The likelihood is the comfort zone prevails, but I reckon it will be close.
Long Bailey is the IDS candidate to Starmer's Portillo, Starmer will be more willing to tell Labour members what they do not want to hear (though perhaps not on Brexit).
Though IDS did at least get the Tories talking about public services and was a step up from Hague
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Successful London professional who bought property in his twenties and kept up the mortgage payments, at a guess, in which case it would be odd if he weren't a "multi millionaire". Not a really useful expression any more.
Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.
That's a wing not a spoiler. A spoiler decreases drag by increasing turbulence to detach laminar flow. A wing (like this one) increases drag to provide downforce and thereby grip.
There was little mention of the red wall before 2019. Curious that.
The truth is Labour have been slaughtered. Only the Brexit party saved another 20 seats or so. Many of the results have turned safe Labour to safe Tory in one fell swoop. For me the reason is clear. Labour talked as if all Bar the billionaires are on the bread line. They hate Britain's past, its institutions and most of its allies. Of course there are problems but most ordinary people get by, like the Queen and don't hate Jews. The fact that the current hierarchy in party missed all this, and still do, means most of the early contenders to lead them pretty well doomed.
I love the idea that these MPs are actually going to achieve something for their areas. They obviously do politics differently in NI. Personally, I think that these MPs will once again return to obscurity after the DUPs moment in the sun in the last Parliament. They really should have worked harder to ensure that happy state continued for as long as possible.
Not a good idea. There are few if any roads called Long-Bailey but lots called Bailey. If she sticks to Long-Bailey they won't have to rename them when Labour lose Knowsley.
Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.
That's a wing not a spoiler. A spoiler decreases drag by increasing turbulence to detach laminar flow. A wing (like this one) increases drag to provide downforce and thereby grip.
Comments like this are what make PB worth reading.
I think ten years is a given as they lost power in 2010 and I can’t see another G E before May this year unless Gina Millar somehow gets this one quashed in the courts.
As we working class types have known for ages, it used to be that having a double barrelled surname was a sign of fine breeding, now it means your mum’s a slapper.
Not a good idea. There are few if any roads called Long-Bailey but lots called Bailey. If she sticks to Long-Bailey they won't have to rename them when Labour lose Knowsley.
I love the idea that these MPs are actually going to achieve something for their areas. They obviously do politics differently in NI. Personally, I think that these MPs will once again return to obscurity after the DUPs moment in the sun in the last Parliament. They really should have worked harder to ensure that happy state continued for as long as possible.
DUP - more principled and less smart than the SNP
Principled and DUP in the same sentence? There's originality for you.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.
That's a wing not a spoiler. A spoiler decreases drag by increasing turbulence to detach laminar flow. A wing (like this one) increases drag to provide downforce and thereby grip.
Thanks.
In your opinion, which of Qantas and Cathay Pacific has the more attractive Frequent Flyer program?
As we working class types have known for ages, it used to be that having a double barrelled surname was a sign of fine breeding, now it means your mum’s a slapper.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
You're lucky you are not in place where Labour have been in charge of the educational system for twenty years.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
State til Eight
As a Libdem myself, my advice to Labour would be to stop the infighting and get the leadership sorted asap. All they are doing at the moment is feeding the tory wolves, entertaining the Tories in parliament and fulfilling public conceptions (or misconceptions). As the Tories start wriggling and squirming out of their promises (as they surely will), the opposition parties need to start calling them out. God knows it's also going to be difficult for the libdems to find never mind choose a leader untainted.
As we working class types have known for ages, it used to be that having a double barrelled surname was a sign of fine breeding, now it means your mum’s a slapper.
1. Even if it realises it has to put a big distance between itself and Corbyn (not a given) and realises it has to accept that we have left the EU (not a given) the Labour Party is still going to spend the next five years playing catch-up.
2. Boris will be shameless in nicking any popular policies that Labour stumbles upon in that five years.
3. Labour's strategy for the next election is very, very tricky. Where the hell does it target? If it wants power again, it has to win seats in Scotland. That means five years of piling on to the inadequacies of the SNP in Scotland. Of the fallacies over an independent Scotland. But unless they are going to make 125 gains next time out - dream on - they will need that same SNP in coalition. That very pissed off SNP.
4. If Boris delivers to those places left behind, in any way that shows material results, then Labour's bigger poblem is defending the seats it still has. Are those three seats in Hull still going to keep delivering Labour MPs if they can look across the Humber at the construction projects in Grimsby? All those places that just clung on for Labour need a reason to not make one last heave to go Tory. There's going to be plenty of Brexit Party votes looking for a new home. Naive to think they are going back to Labour. Hull, Sunderland, Doncaster, Coventry, Newport, Bradford, Halifax, Rotherham - this is where the next election will be hard forught. Money and effort send defending these is just money and effort spent locking in Boris's current 80 seat majority.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
You're lucky you are not in place where Labour have been in charge of the educational system for twenty years.
Like Wales.
And most of London - where the schools are excellent.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
You're lucky you are not in place where Labour have been in charge of the educational system for twenty years.
Like Wales.
And most of London - where the schools are excellent.
While operating under Tory or coalition governments unlike Wales.
Anyhoo, I’ve watched The Rise Of Skywalker and I’m about to post a huge Star Wars spoiler.
That's a wing not a spoiler. A spoiler decreases drag by increasing turbulence to detach laminar flow. A wing (like this one) increases drag to provide downforce and thereby grip.
They've entrenched the Corbynites at the top of the party by giving them staff positions rather than political positions, so £100k Milne and £90k Murphy are going to cost tens of thousands to pay off. They can't be made redundant, because positions are made redundant rather than people (the employment tribunal would be worth watching with popcorn though!).
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
You're lucky you are not in place where Labour have been in charge of the educational system for twenty years.
Like Wales.
And most of London - where the schools are excellent.
There is a funding gap in money spent per pupil between England & Wales -- and a huge one between London & Wales.
Looking at this as a function of time, the gap was at its largest in the B;lair/Brown years. It has decreased in recent years, but is still not eliminated.
Labour pour money into London as usual, but their loyal voters (and feck, they are loyal in South Wales) get the crumbs & leavings from London's table.
Labour -- the national Party run by Londoners for Londoners.
1. Even if it realises it has to put a big distance between itself and Corbyn (not a given) and realises it has to accept that we have left the EU (not a given) the Labour Party is still going to spend the next five years playing catch-up.
2. Boris will be shameless in nicking any popular policies that Labour stumbles upon in that five years.
3. Labour's strategy for the next election is very, very tricky. Where the hell does it target? If it wants power again, it has to win seats in Scotland. That means five years of piling on to the inadequacies of the SNP in Scotland. Of the fallacies over an independent Scotland. But unless they are going to make 125 gains next time out - dream on - they will need that same SNP in coalition. That very pissed off SNP.
4. If Boris delivers to those places left behind, in any way that shows material results, then Labour's bigger poblem is defending the seats it still has. Are those three seats in Hull still going to keep delivering Labour MPs if they can look across the Humber at the construction projects in Grimsby? All those places that just clung on for Labour need a reason to not make one last heave to go Tory. There's going to be plenty of Brexit Party votes looking for a new home. Naive to think they are going back to Labour. Hull, Sunderland, Doncaster, Coventry, Newport, Bradford, Halifax, Rotherham - this is where the next election will be hard forught. Money and effort send defending these is just money and effort spent locking in Boris's current 80 seat majority.
That's what I took away as being his point.
One reason why I suspect the seats that went Tory in 2019 will do well over the next 5 years (money thrown at them) is to ensure the next lot go blue the next time around.
The plan will be - look at Teesside (other places may be available) and see what 5 years of Tory leadership has done for the area.
I thought The Last Jedi was pretty damned bad (not as bad as some reviews I read, but still). On the other hand, I agree with you about The Empire Strikes Back.
I thought The Last Jedi was pretty damned bad (not as bad as some reviews I read, but still). On the other hand, I agree with you about The Empire Strikes Back.
There's quite a variation in the Conservative Northern gains.
There are traditional marginals which are still traditional marginals - the Burys, Bolton NE, Keighley, Colne Valley, High Peak.
There is the 'Conservative mining belt' - Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Bolsover, Penistone, Don and Rother Valleys - which I can see becoming safe Conservative seats as the likes of Sherwood and Cannock to their south have done.
There are the Tees Valley, Blyth Valley and Cumbria constituencies which might be similar to the Conservative mining belt.
And there are more individual seats with more local issues - Redcar, Burnley, Grimsby for example.
They've entrenched the Corbynites at the top of the party by giving them staff positions rather than political positions, so £100k Milne and £90k Murphy are going to cost tens of thousands to pay off. They can't be made redundant, because positions are made redundant rather than people (the employment tribunal would be worth watching with popcorn though!).
Just woken up. The first proper lie in of the Christmas holidays is always the sweetest.
With Milne, every time I look at the tenth rate posho who calls himself a Communist and has never knowingly told the truth since leaving Winchester, I am irresistibly reminded of that wonderful line in Tinker Tailor Solider Spy:
‘As a good Socialist, I’m going where the money is.’
1. Even if it realises it has to put a big distance between itself and Corbyn (not a given) and realises it has to accept that we have left the EU (not a given) the Labour Party is still going to spend the next five years playing catch-up.
2. Boris will be shameless in nicking any popular policies that Labour stumbles upon in that five years.
3. Labour's strategy for the next election is very, very tricky. Where the hell does it target? If it wants power again, it has to win seats in Scotland. That means five years of piling on to the inadequacies of the SNP in Scotland. Of the fallacies over an independent Scotland. But unless they are going to make 125 gains next time out - dream on - they will need that same SNP in coalition. That very pissed off SNP.
4. If Boris delivers to those places left behind, in any way that shows material results, then Labour's bigger poblem is defending the seats it still has. Are those three seats in Hull still going to keep delivering Labour MPs if they can look across the Humber at the construction projects in Grimsby? All those places that just clung on for Labour need a reason to not make one last heave to go Tory. There's going to be plenty of Brexit Party votes looking for a new home. Naive to think they are going back to Labour. Hull, Sunderland, Doncaster, Coventry, Newport, Bradford, Halifax, Rotherham - this is where the next election will be hard forught. Money and effort send defending these is just money and effort spent locking in Boris's current 80 seat majority.
That's what I took away as being his point.
One reason why I suspect the seats that went Tory in 2019 will do well over the next 5 years (money thrown at them) is to ensure the next lot go blue the next time around.
The plan will be - look at Teesside (other places may be available) and see what 5 years of Tory leadership has done for the area.
To which Labour's response is to scream "But..but...but...look at all that money they are throwing around. Where is that coming from, eh? Taxpayers? Borrowing? Don't they know that is OUR sole prerogative?"
Any Tories uneasy at the lack of fiscal probity ain't exactly going to run towards Labour's "Hold my pint..." reply.
There's quite a variation in the Conservative Northern gains.
There are traditional marginals which are still traditional marginals - the Burys, Bolton NE, Keighley, Colne Valley, High Peak.
There is the 'Conservative mining belt' - Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Bolsover, Penistone, Don and Rother Valleys - which I can see becoming safe Conservative seats as the likes of Sherwood and Cannock to their south have done.
There are the Tees Valley, Blyth Valley and Cumbria constituencies which might be similar to the Conservative mining belt.
And there are more individual seats with more local issues - Redcar, Burnley, Grimsby for example.
Probably worth splitting those individual seats into 2 groups - those with local issues (Burnley) and coastal seats with deep seated issues due to their location on the coast without decent communication links
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
And most of London - where the schools are excellent.
There is a funding gap in money spent per pupil between England & Wales -- and a huge one between London & Wales.
Looking at this as a function of time, the gap was at its largest in the B;lair/Brown years. It has decreased in recent years, but is still not eliminated.
Labour pour money into London as usual, but their loyal voters (and feck, they are loyal in South Wales) get the crumbs & leavings from London's table.
Labour -- the national Party run by Londoners for Londoners.
Realistically is it possible to provide a national level education service without a gap in funding favouring London given teachers are the biggest cost and living costs are significantly higher in London?
In terms of fairness Londoners dont expect every region should pay the same levels of tax, those with more pay more. In return why shouldnt those with higher costs beyond their control receive more?
Lloyd Russell Moyle indicates to another person, See You Next Tuesday.
Epic self awareness fail there.
One of the most disappointing aspects of this election, along with Uxbridge staying blue, was that nobody in Brighton Kemptown proved capable of toppling this lowlife scumbag.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
You're lucky you are not in place where Labour have been in charge of the educational system for twenty years.
Like Wales.
The improvement in London schools is mostly due to having more hard working ethnic minority kids (like mine). Monocultural areas like Wales have fallen behind.
Just the stuff the get millions of Tory voters to have another careful think about how excellent it would be to lend Labour their vote next time. Keep up the good work.
They've entrenched the Corbynites at the top of the party by giving them staff positions rather than political positions, so £100k Milne and £90k Murphy are going to cost tens of thousands to pay off. They can't be made redundant, because positions are made redundant rather than people (the employment tribunal would be worth watching with popcorn though!).
Just woken up. The first proper lie in of the Christmas holidays is always the sweetest.
With Milne, every time I look at the tenth rate posho who calls himself a Communist and has never knowingly told the truth since leaving Winchester, I am irresistibly reminded of that wonderful line in Tinker Tailor Solider Spy:
‘As a good Socialist, I’m going where the money is.’
Lucky you. I woke up at six and couldn’t get back to sleep.
There's quite a variation in the Conservative Northern gains.
There are traditional marginals which are still traditional marginals - the Burys, Bolton NE, Keighley, Colne Valley, High Peak.
There is the 'Conservative mining belt' - Ashfield, Bassetlaw, Bolsover, Penistone, Don and Rother Valleys - which I can see becoming safe Conservative seats as the likes of Sherwood and Cannock to their south have done.
There are the Tees Valley, Blyth Valley and Cumbria constituencies which might be similar to the Conservative mining belt.
And there are more individual seats with more local issues - Redcar, Burnley, Grimsby for example.
Probably worth splitting those individual seats into 2 groups - those with local issues (Burnley) and coastal seats with deep seated issues due to their location on the coast without decent communication links
I'm intending doing more work on this subject myself over the Christmas period, when I should finally have more time to do some detailed analysis.
Realistically is it possible to provide a national level education service without a gap in funding favouring London given teachers are the biggest cost and living costs are significantly higher in London?
In terms of fairness Londoners dont expect every region should pay the same levels of tax, those with more pay more. In return why shouldnt those with higher costs beyond their control receive more?
I think you have to address the huge disparity in outcomes. E.g., the single biggest bias in entrance to Oxbridge is not based on gender or race. It is based on geography. 45 per cent of all Oxbridge entrants come from London & the South East.
Or look at the PISA statistics. Wales is falling, falling, falling. The worst place in the UK.
London grabs way too much of the national resources -- if living costs in London are too high, then the proper conclusion is not London must grab more but to relocate organisations out of London.
E.g., there is no reason for Imperial College to be in London. They could sell their prime real estate and relocate. They would make a profit. The professors would find their academic salaries go further, it would be cheaper for the students.
If you want to save this rickety, falling-to-bits country, there has to be a truly massive relocation of institutions and resources OUT of London.
Sturgeon gives the game away - she knows full well there's not going to be another Indyref in the next few years but hopes to build a grudge sufficient for the SNP to win a future referendum next generation once the Tories lose their majority in the UK.
Realistically is it possible to provide a national level education service without a gap in funding favouring London given teachers are the biggest cost and living costs are significantly higher in London?
In terms of fairness Londoners dont expect every region should pay the same levels of tax, those with more pay more. In return why shouldnt those with higher costs beyond their control receive more?
I think you have to address the huge disparity in outcomes. E.g., the single biggest bias in entrance to Oxbridge is not based on gender or race. It is based on geography. 45 per cent of all Oxbridge entrants come from London & the South East.
Or look at the PISA statistics. Wales is falling, falling, falling. The worst place in the UK.
London grabs way too much of the national resources -- if living costs in London are too high, then the proper conclusion is not London must grab more but to relocate organisations out of London.
E.g., there is no reason for Imperial College to be in London. They could sell their prime real estate and relocate. They would make a profit. The professors would find their academic salaries go further, it would be cheaper for the students.
If you want to save this rickety, falling-to-bits country, there has to be a truly massive relocation of institutions and resources OUT of London.
The University of Wales has offices in London......perhaps start with those!
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
You're lucky you are not in place where Labour have been in charge of the educational system for twenty years.
Like Wales.
The improvement in London schools is mostly due to having more hard working ethnic minority kids (like mine). Monocultural areas like Wales have fallen behind.
Realistically is it possible to provide a national level education service without a gap in funding favouring London given teachers are the biggest cost and living costs are significantly higher in London?
In terms of fairness Londoners dont expect every region should pay the same levels of tax, those with more pay more. In return why shouldnt those with higher costs beyond their control receive more?
I think you have to address the huge disparity in outcomes. E.g., the single biggest bias in entrance to Oxbridge is not based on gender or race. It is based on geography. 45 per cent of all Oxbridge entrants come from London & the South East.
Or look at the PISA statistics. Wales is falling, falling, falling. The worst place in the UK.
London grabs way too much of the national resources -- if living costs in London are too high, then the proper conclusion is not London must grab more but to relocate organisations out of London.
E.g., there is no reason for Imperial College to be in London. They could sell their prime real estate and relocate. They would make a profit. The professors would find their academic salaries go further, it would be cheaper for the students.
If you want to save this rickety, falling-to-bits country, there has to be a truly massive relocation of institutions and resources OUT of London.
from what i read before it was a screen grab from a private message. There are things you say in private that you would never say in public.
Say, perhaps, as long as it is not in front of a microphone. But these days an MP should probably expect anything they type to be used against them in evidence.
They've entrenched the Corbynites at the top of the party by giving them staff positions rather than political positions, so £100k Milne and £90k Murphy are going to cost tens of thousands to pay off. They can't be made redundant, because positions are made redundant rather than people (the employment tribunal would be worth watching with popcorn though!).
Just woken up. The first proper lie in of the Christmas holidays is always the sweetest.
With Milne, every time I look at the tenth rate posho who calls himself a Communist and has never knowingly told the truth since leaving Winchester, I am irresistibly reminded of that wonderful line in Tinker Tailor Solider Spy:
‘As a good Socialist, I’m going where the money is.’
Lucky you. I woke up at six and couldn’t get back to sleep.
I think I’m so exhausted after the last term, and particularly the last few weeks where the SLT, for reasons best known to themselves, decided to launch about six vexatious actions against different members of my union all of which I had to expend endless energy dealing with, that I would have slept through the last trump last night.
Realistically is it possible to provide a national level education service without a gap in funding favouring London given teachers are the biggest cost and living costs are significantly higher in London?
In terms of fairness Londoners dont expect every region should pay the same levels of tax, those with more pay more. In return why shouldnt those with higher costs beyond their control receive more?
I think you have to address the huge disparity in outcomes. E.g., the single biggest bias in entrance to Oxbridge is not based on gender or race. It is based on geography. 45 per cent of all Oxbridge entrants come from London & the South East.
Or look at the PISA statistics. Wales is falling, falling, falling. The worst place in the UK.
London grabs way too much of the national resources -- if living costs in London are too high, then the proper conclusion is not London must grab more but to relocate organisations out of London.
E.g., there is no reason for Imperial College to be in London. They could sell their prime real estate and relocate. They would make a profit. The professors would find their academic salaries go further, it would be cheaper for the students.
If you want to save this rickety, falling-to-bits country, there has to be a truly massive relocation of institutions and resources OUT of London.
I am not saying the balance on govt education spending is right at the moment, I am not an expert and accept I dont know. I am saying that logically the right balance is London gets more per person because their costs are higher. How much more is obviously tricky and its unlikely to ever be "right", it will either be too much or too little at any given point.
The fullest significance of these facts lies in what it says about the reasoning of voters who made that journey. It is common on the left simply to caricature the Tory party and its voters as either bigoted or deluded. Doing this absolves them from ever having to think carefully about what the Tories stand for, or why people vote for them. After a result like last week’s it might be wiser to experiment for a while by treating the Tory party as a rational organisation, and its voters as people making reasoned decisions.
This is not unique to the left. It is a feature of modern politics and afflicts the right just as much, who could not believe why anyone could vote for Labour under Corbyn.
Read on...
It may also follow that it is wrong to place too much weight on the idea that those who swung from Labour to Conservative have merely “lent” their votes to Boris Johnson. Brexit is certainly a top priority for these voters, and Johnson’s early reaction to his victory included a recognition that these votes were conditional. But these swing voters do not seem to be Brexit obsessives to the exclusion of all other issues. They also have some confidence in Johnson himself (at least in comparison to Corbyn) and they think the Tories would run the economy better.
If that is correct, then these newly won votes could prove to be on permanent loan, and any new Labour leader will have their work cut out to win them back. The Johnson government is focused on these voters. The Queen’s speech and the budget will be aimed at retaining them. Tony Blair predicted yesterday that, after Brexit, Johnson will try to define the Tories on the centre ground. Blair is probably right. Labour, meanwhile, will first have to regain the right to be heard and then have to set out its own measures to regain their trust. In this, precisely because they are the government, all the cards are in the Tories’ hand.
I am currently reading Dominic Sandbrook’s “Who Dares Wins” about the early 1980’s and there are so many parallels with today - for both parties.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
You're lucky you are not in place where Labour have been in charge of the educational system for twenty years.
Like Wales.
And most of London - where the schools are excellent.
While operating under Tory or coalition governments unlike Wales.
And a Labour government before that. It’s about the demographics more than anything.
Realistically is it possible to provide a national level education service without a gap in funding favouring London given teachers are the biggest cost and living costs are significantly higher in London?
In terms of fairness Londoners dont expect every region should pay the same levels of tax, those with more pay more. In return why shouldnt those with higher costs beyond their control receive more?
I think you have to address the huge disparity in outcomes. E.g., the single biggest bias in entrance to Oxbridge is not based on gender or race. It is based on geography. 45 per cent of all Oxbridge entrants come from London & the South East.
Or look at the PISA statistics. Wales is falling, falling, falling. The worst place in the UK.
London grabs way too much of the national resources -- if living costs in London are too high, then the proper conclusion is not London must grab more but to relocate organisations out of London.
E.g., there is no reason for Imperial College to be in London. They could sell their prime real estate and relocate. They would make a profit. The professors would find their academic salaries go further, it would be cheaper for the students.
If you want to save this rickety, falling-to-bits country, there has to be a truly massive relocation of institutions and resources OUT of London.
The University of Wales has offices in London......perhaps start with those!
God knows why -- where is it, I could not find it mentioned on their website.
But, the process I have mentioned is taking place in Leiden or Munich. Historic universities are selling prime real estate in the centre and moving out to Oegstgeest or Garching.
It is beyond-stupid to have a University on the Strand or in Kensington.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
You're lucky you are not in place where Labour have been in charge of the educational system for twenty years.
Like Wales.
The improvement in London schools is mostly due to having more hard working ethnic minority kids (like mine). Monocultural areas like Wales have fallen behind.
The only word for that is ... racist.
Not really. It's the academic consensus based on empirical research. It's got nothing to do with race, and everything to do with parental expectations.
Sturgeon gives the game away - she knows full well there's not going to be another Indyref in the next few years but hopes to build a grudge sufficient for the SNP to win a future referendum next generation once the Tories lose their majority in the UK.
No - she wants to be able to pin the blame on all the Scottish Governments failings on something other than the Government's Leadership.
An independence referendum is perfect - she can blame the UK government for lack of money and use it to deflect attention as soon as questions are asked about anything the Scottish Government is responsible for (Police, Schools, NHS).
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
You're lucky you are not in place where Labour have been in charge of the educational system for twenty years.
Like Wales.
The improvement in London schools is mostly due to having more hard working ethnic minority kids (like mine). Monocultural areas like Wales have fallen behind.
Realistically is it possible to provide a national level education service without a gap in funding favouring London given teachers are the biggest cost and living costs are significantly higher in London?
In terms of fairness Londoners dont expect every region should pay the same levels of tax, those with more pay more. In return why shouldnt those with higher costs beyond their control receive more?
I think you have to address the huge disparity in outcomes. E.g., the single biggest bias in entrance to Oxbridge is not based on gender or race. It is based on geography. 45 per cent of all Oxbridge entrants come from London & the South East.
Or look at the PISA statistics. Wales is falling, falling, falling. The worst place in the UK.
London grabs way too much of the national resources -- if living costs in London are too high, then the proper conclusion is not London must grab more but to relocate organisations out of London.
E.g., there is no reason for Imperial College to be in London. They could sell their prime real estate and relocate. They would make a profit. The professors would find their academic salaries go further, it would be cheaper for the students.
If you want to save this rickety, falling-to-bits country, there has to be a truly massive relocation of institutions and resources OUT of London.
The University of Wales has offices in London......perhaps start with those!
God knows why -- where is it, I could not find it mentioned on their website.
But, the process I have mentioned is taking place in Leiden or Munich. Historic universities are selling prime real estate in the centre and moving out to Oegstgeest or Garching.
It is beyond-stupid to have a University on the Strand or in Kensington.
Perhaps they make more money from foreign students by being based in London? Which then subsidises the part of the university in Wales? Or perhaps its just a daft status project.
Does anyone know how Keir Starmer became a multi millionaire (if indeed he is)
Keir Starmer QC?
No, no idea (in fairness some of that may be in property assets).
Labour is accused of 'vile hypocrisy' for tax raid on buy-to-let landlords despite a quarter of their front bench owning second homes Emily Thornberry owns three properties in her multimillion-pound portfolio Keir Starmer owns a £1.75million house in London and a £600,000 Surrey home
Married 2007, 2 kids - so I guess they may be coming up to secondary education shortly...
Yep - and they’ll go to the local state schools. Why wouldn’t they? London schools are excellent. There’s no reason to go private.
Absolutely. My kids are all at London state schools (one secondary, two primary of whom one about to move up). All doing really well, good teachers, nice mates, walk to school, absolutely no complaints, although we have noticed the impact of real terms per pupil funding cuts in recent years.
You're lucky you are not in place where Labour have been in charge of the educational system for twenty years.
Like Wales.
And most of London - where the schools are excellent.
While operating under Tory or coalition governments unlike Wales.
And a Labour government before that. It’s about the demographics more than anything.
Do please expand your thoughts.
Why do you think the Welsh education is so unsuccessful?
You have hinted something, let's hear it spelled out.
Comments
I expect Knives Out will still be at Curzon cinemas, it was still on at the Odeon last night though may not be next week.
Otherwise 1917 looks interesting and might wait for that in January
I suspect geeks will love it, the casual viewer less so.
Big losers were the DUP who lost 2 seats and failed to take North Down, Sinn Fein also saw their vote down despite winning North Belfast.
The UUP also almost took Fermanagah and South Tyrone from Sinn Fein.
The good news is it was mainly a vote against the DUP and Sinn Fein extremes and for a return to power sharing at Stormont
non existent WMD//
https://twitter.com/oflynnsocial/status/1207582567446306816?s=20
Though IDS did at least get the Tories talking about public services and was a step up from Hague
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/residents-corbyn-road-want-street-21093185
The Last Jedi was Star Wars meets Marvel humour, it was fun.
In your opinion, which of Qantas and Cathay Pacific has the more attractive Frequent Flyer program?
She can hardly talk about:
Planes: https://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/prestwick-airport-cuts-losses-but-still-no-sight-of-a-sale-1-5062408
Or Boats: https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18109925.disastrous-ferry-contract-costs-scots-taxpayers-extra-100m/
Or Trains: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/12/18/scottish-government-accused-failure-ends-abellio-scotrail-contract/
How about Hospital.....education.....no?
https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/corbyn-seumas-milne-karie-murphy-permanent-contracts_uk_5df7acc7e4b03aed50f2409f
Like Wales.
2. Boris will be shameless in nicking any popular policies that Labour stumbles upon in that five years.
3. Labour's strategy for the next election is very, very tricky. Where the hell does it target? If it wants power again, it has to win seats in Scotland. That means five years of piling on to the inadequacies of the SNP in Scotland. Of the fallacies over an independent Scotland. But unless they are going to make 125 gains next time out - dream on - they will need that same SNP in coalition. That very pissed off SNP.
4. If Boris delivers to those places left behind, in any way that shows material results, then Labour's bigger poblem is defending the seats it still has. Are those three seats in Hull still going to keep delivering Labour MPs if they can look across the Humber at the construction projects in Grimsby? All those places that just clung on for Labour need a reason to not make one last heave to go Tory. There's going to be plenty of Brexit Party votes looking for a new home. Naive to think they are going back to Labour. Hull, Sunderland, Doncaster, Coventry, Newport, Bradford, Halifax, Rotherham - this is where the next election will be hard forught. Money and effort send defending these is just money and effort spent locking in Boris's current 80 seat majority.
That's what I took away as being his point.
"His favourite music? “Beethoven piano sonatas.” He pauses, “actually all things Beethoven.” And his favourite musician? “Barenboim.”"
https://onthehill.info/2015/11/hello-mp-keir-starmer/
They've entrenched the Corbynites at the top of the party by giving them staff positions rather than political positions, so £100k Milne and £90k Murphy are going to cost tens of thousands to pay off. They can't be made redundant, because positions are made redundant rather than people (the employment tribunal would be worth watching with popcorn though!).
Looking at this as a function of time, the gap was at its largest in the B;lair/Brown years. It has decreased in recent years, but is still not eliminated.
Labour pour money into London as usual, but their loyal voters (and feck, they are loyal in South Wales) get the crumbs & leavings from London's table.
Labour -- the national Party run by Londoners for Londoners.
The plan will be - look at Teesside (other places may be available) and see what 5 years of Tory leadership has done for the area.
I thought The Last Jedi was pretty damned bad (not as bad as some reviews I read, but still). On the other hand, I agree with you about The Empire Strikes Back.
An old ramble, by me, on the former: https://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.com/2018/07/so-last-jedi-spoilers-galore.html
With Milne, every time I look at the tenth rate posho who calls himself a Communist and has never knowingly told the truth since leaving Winchester, I am irresistibly reminded of that wonderful line in Tinker Tailor Solider Spy:
‘As a good Socialist, I’m going where the money is.’
Any Tories uneasy at the lack of fiscal probity ain't exactly going to run towards Labour's "Hold my pint..." reply.
In terms of fairness Londoners dont expect every region should pay the same levels of tax, those with more pay more. In return why shouldnt those with higher costs beyond their control receive more?
Epic self awareness fail there.
One of the most disappointing aspects of this election, along with Uxbridge staying blue, was that nobody in Brighton Kemptown proved capable of toppling this lowlife scumbag.
Plants are brighter than this.
Or look at the PISA statistics. Wales is falling, falling, falling. The worst place in the UK.
London grabs way too much of the national resources -- if living costs in London are too high, then the proper conclusion is not London must grab more but to relocate organisations out of London.
E.g., there is no reason for Imperial College to be in London. They could sell their prime real estate and relocate. They would make a profit. The professors would find their academic salaries go further, it would be cheaper for the students.
If you want to save this rickety, falling-to-bits country, there has to be a truly massive relocation of institutions and resources OUT of London.
Fortunately we’re building HS2.
*grabs tinfoil hat and ducks*
This is not fair. But it is where we are.
But, the process I have mentioned is taking place in Leiden or Munich. Historic universities are selling prime real estate in the centre and moving out to Oegstgeest or Garching.
It is beyond-stupid to have a University on the Strand or in Kensington.
An independence referendum is perfect - she can blame the UK government for lack of money and use it to deflect attention as soon as questions are asked about anything the Scottish Government is responsible for (Police, Schools, NHS).
Perhaps they make more money from foreign students by being based in London? Which then subsidises the part of the university in Wales? Or perhaps its just a daft status project.
Why do you think the Welsh education is so unsuccessful?
You have hinted something, let's hear it spelled out.