Labour should and I hope will stay well beyond power until they update their economic and social world-view beyond the 19th Century (and I do mean the 19th). The world really has moved on.
The principles of a shared prosperity and a shared responsibility are good. Stealing and rabble rousing aren't appropriate solutions in those areas though.
I have not heard a sensible word out of the mouth of a Labour politician on economic matters since Darling left the scene, and even he mostly spouted nonsense.
Labour's electability depends on their next leader's choice of shadow chancellor.
The sensible thing to do would be to give that to the deputy leader.
The worry about this leadership election is that if Starmer wins he may feel obliged to give it to Long Bailey as meat to his Corbynista wing.
The Deputy Leader is going to be Angela Rayner, it's an elected position.
Yes, I know. I am saying that the person who is elected deputy should be made Shadow Chancellor.
That could be Burgon! Noooooo!
Ummm...no. Not in this space time continuum it couldn’t be.
Tell me you haven't had second thoughts now I have alerted you to such a scary proposition.
Second, third, fourth, fifth and sixth thoughts.
But surely even a Labour party that elected Corbyn wouldn't be *that* crazy...
No it really is possible, although mercifully at the moment unlikely.
Labour's best electoral future seemingly is taking all the good parts of the 2017 manifesto and then junking what made it all go wrong in 2019.
The leader and Brexit were two massive issues and are now gone, so if they pick Starmer, Nandy or Phillips they're probably in the best position they possibly can be in.
I think it grossly understates the problems they face to say, essentially, dust down the 2017 manifesto and be less grumpy than Corbyn.
They have just heavily lost an election where the fundamentals were actually pretty good for them - relatively unpopular Tory leader, divided party of government which had failed in its key objective, national crisis, and insipid economy.
They don't look anywhere close to being a Government in waiting. They need a heavy injection of discipline, a complete change in electoral strategy, a new internal culture and language, an agenda which is looks serious rather than freebie-driven, a strategy to deal with Scotland. It's a huge, huge task for Starmer or anyone else.
I don't disagree with the analysis you've made - but I do think if you are to look at Labour's performance in the 2010s, the 2017 performance was the best and hence it logically makes sense to see what did work that year and what didn't.
My point is that Labour could be in a much worse position if it chooses RLB or ET, at least with Starmer he'll be pragmatic enough to move the party as needed.
I wouldn't write them off yet, just 15 years ago the Tories were seemingly dead and buried.
The last line is incorrect. The Tories were in far better shape 15 years ago than Labour is now. The Populus poll in January 2005 (i.e. exactly 15 years ago) showed Lab 38% Con 33%. At the May 2005 General Election, the Tony Blair Labour government managed a majority of just 3% over Michael Howard's Tories.
Labour's position is much closer to the Tories' situation at the 1997 General Election. In 1997, Tony Blair's Labour was at 43% with a John Major-led Tory Party at 31%. The respective figures are now almost the same, but in reverse (44% v 32%). This suggests it will be a lot more than 15 years before Labour achieves a solid working majority.
Labour's position is more akin to post-1987 election when the Tory lead was 11.8% across GB compared with 11.6% last month. Whilst it is true that Labour now only has 203 seats whereas in 1987 they won 229, the difference is more than accounted for by Scotland where Labour had 50 seats that year rather than the single MP for Edinburgh South. Thus , Labour now has 202 seats in England & Wales compared with just 179 in 1987. On that basis, Labour's challenge next time is similar to what faced it in 1992.
Iranian civilians are being shot dead in Tehran. Not looking good.
I am starting to wonder if the Iranian government is about implode. It looks as though Soleimani may have been even more important in keeping things going than everybody thought. Certainly they are currently giving every sign of being both in total disarray and an advanced state of panic. Shooting student protestors was the last mistake the Shah made and the proximate cause of the Iranian revolution of 1979 - a fact that should give Khamenei pause for thought.
Perhaps one thing we should remember is he was one of the comparatively few government ministers who was middle-aged rather than geriatric.
It would be more than slightly ironic if one of Trump's crazy moments actually caused the collapse of one of the most dangerous governments in the middle east - although whether it would improve matters would depend on what replaced it.
Labour's position is more akin to post-1987 election when the Tory lead was 11.8% across GB compared with 11.6% last month. Whilst it is true that Labour now only has 203 seats whereas in 1987 they won 229, the difference is more than accounted for by Scotland where Labour had 50 seats that year rather than the single MP for Edinburgh South. Thus , Labour now has 202 seats in England & Wales compared with just 179 in 1987. On that basis, Labour's challenge next time is similar to what faced it in 1992.
It might be worth focussing on England alone - no election since 1974 (except possibly 2017) has been decisively affected by just one of the three Celtic nations, due to their small size.
On that basis, Labour in 1987 had 154 seats, compared to 180 now.
Iranian civilians are being shot dead in Tehran. Not looking good.
I am starting to wonder if the Iranian government is about implode. It looks as though Soleimani may have been even more important in keeping things going than everybody thought. Certainly they are currently giving every sign of being both in total disarray and an advanced state of panic. Shooting student protestors was the last mistake the Shah made and the proximate cause of the Iranian revolution of 1979 - a fact that should give Khamenei pause for thought.
Perhaps one thing we should remember is he was one of the comparatively few government ministers who was middle-aged rather than geriatric.
It would be more than slightly ironic if one of Trump's crazy moments actually caused the collapse of one of the most dangerous governments in the middle east - although whether it would improve matters would depend on what replaced it.
They have been shooting protesters for a while - not sure our press gave it much prominence before.
Labour's best electoral future seemingly is taking all the good parts of the 2017 manifesto and then junking what made it all go wrong in 2019.
The leader and Brexit were two massive issues and are now gone, so if they pick Starmer, Nandy or Phillips they're probably in the best position they possibly can be in.
I think it grossly understates the problems they face to say, essentially, dust down the 2017 manifesto and be less grumpy than Corbyn.
They have just heavily lost an election where the fundamentals were actually pretty good for them - relatively unpopular Tory leader, divided party of government which had failed in its key objective, national crisis, and insipid economy.
They don't look anywhere close to being a Government in waiting. They need a heavy injection of discipline, a complete change in electoral strategy, a new internal culture and language, an agenda which is looks serious rather than freebie-driven, a strategy to deal with Scotland. It's a huge, huge task for Starmer or anyone else.
I don't disagree with the analysis you've made - but I do think if you are to look at Labour's performance in the 2010s, the 2017 performance was the best and hence it logically makes sense to see what did work that year and what didn't.
My point is that Labour could be in a much worse position if it chooses RLB or ET, at least with Starmer he'll be pragmatic enough to move the party as needed.
I wouldn't write them off yet, just 15 years ago the Tories were seemingly dead and buried.
The last line is incorrect. The Tories were in far better shape 15 years ago than Labour is now. The Populus poll in January 2005 (i.e. exactly 15 years ago) showed Lab 38% Con 33%. At the May 2005 General Election, the Tony Blair Labour government managed a majority of just 3% over Michael Howard's Tories.
Labour's position is much closer to the Tories' situation at the 1997 General Election. In 1997, Tony Blair's Labour was at 43% with a John Major-led Tory Party at 31%. The respective figures are now almost the same, but in reverse (44% v 32%). This suggests it will be a lot more than 15 years before Labour achieves a solid working majority.
The Tories got 32% in 2005 too to be fair but had a working majority 10 years later
Iranian civilians are being shot dead in Tehran. Not looking good.
I am starting to wonder if the Iranian government is about implode. It looks as though Soleimani may have been even more important in keeping things going than everybody thought. Certainly they are currently giving every sign of being both in total disarray and an advanced state of panic. Shooting student protestors was the last mistake the Shah made and the proximate cause of the Iranian revolution of 1979 - a fact that should give Khamenei pause for thought.
Perhaps one thing we should remember is he was one of the comparatively few government ministers who was middle-aged rather than geriatric.
It would be more than slightly ironic if one of Trump's crazy moments actually caused the collapse of one of the most dangerous governments in the middle east - although whether it would improve matters would depend on what replaced it.
They have been shooting protesters for a while - not sure our press gave it much prominence before.
They've been shooting protestors for 41 years. So far as I know, this is the first time they've combined it with shooting down airliners, messing up military strikes and kidnapping foreign ambassadors.
Obviously, you are right about Scotland. But whereas Scotland is (or was) an essential part of Labour's coalition, the 6 seats are juts a cherry on the cake for the Tories.
I have just reminded myself of the Scotland popular vote in 2019. I hadn't appreciated that the Conservatives got 180,000 more votes in Scotland than Labour and that they were ahead in the vote share by 25% to 18%. There's a very long way for Labour to go in Scotland ...
Labour's best electoral future seemingly is taking all the good parts of the 2017 manifesto and then junking what made it all go wrong in 2019.
Try the 1997 manifesto and you might be on to something. Make sure you are seen to expel hundreds of Anti-semites and Momentum/Militant activists too. And learn to do aspiration. Nobody will vote for a party that promises to punish those a little wealthier than they are because ay heart they aspire to be there themselves.
It's so hard to separate cause and effect, because economic success attracts and engenders a certain bundle of attitudes, and vice versa. One possible way to break this cycle is to observe that most of the winner-towns of the 21st century have easy access to an international airport. Of course airlines serve thriving areas better, but building the airport in the first place is costly. So this access to global cities and markets seems to be important. What a low-carbon future means is uncertain. It should equalise outcomes, but other technologies like teleworking have not equalised economic success across different areas, even when they look like prime candidates to have done so.
Other countries have capitals outside the main city. If Washington or Canberra are anything to go by, you just create another successful city full of hated metropolitan elites. Sheffield, to choose one example, is already a thoroughly Labour city full of the kinds of people despised by the Brexit identity/supremacy/ultimatum.
Labour's best electoral future seemingly is taking all the good parts of the 2017 manifesto and then junking what made it all go wrong in 2019.
Try the 1997 manifesto and you might be on to something. Make sure you are seen to expel hundreds of Anti-semites and Momentum/Militant activists too. And learn to do aspiration. Nobody will vote for a party that promises to punish those a little wealthier than they are because ay heart they aspire to be there themselves.
Labour's really big problem is that those who traditionally voted for them, unthinking in that because they were supporting the party of the working man, have stopped doing so. And they have stopped doing so because of non-delivery by Labour.
This is not just about Corbyn losing two elections and being unable to deliver his Marxist manifesto. It is because their former voters have simply seen through Labour. Both national and local Labour governance has not made their lives materially better. And once out there, that genie is not getting back in the bottle.
RIP Sir Roger Scruton - lower middle class boy done good
Who's he?
Not someone I suspect you would like!
Why do you say that ?
I can't dislike someone I don't know.
He was a Conservative Philosopher and somewhat controversial. Google him.
In my early teaching career one of my fellow teachers was teaching at his school when he was in the Sixth-form. Didn’t teach him though: wrong subject.
Looking at his Wiki entry I have taught in one or more of the labs where he studied Physics.
"Become financially independent in the next 5 years". 1/2? 50/1 would be tight-fisted. There ought to be a law against odds like that. Some poor sod (glances wearily at bank statement) is going to have to meet their security costs while they trot the globe, smiling for the camera, progressively doing sfa.
Sir Roger was at the centre of controversy last year when he was dismissed from, then reinstated to, an unpaid role as a government housing advisor after criticism of his comments about China and Muslim immigrants.
After he was restored to the role when supporters said his remarks had been misrepresented, he said there was a "witch-hunt" against right-wing figures, aiming to characterise them as racist or fascist.
That is a rather inaccurate take on the situation to say the least. It makes it sound like he was just doing what lots of people caught out complain about, when the reality was he was stitched up when his actual words were revealed.
Sir Roger was at the centre of controversy last year when he was dismissed from, then reinstated to, an unpaid role as a government housing advisor after criticism of his comments about China and Muslim immigrants.
After he was restored to the role when supporters said his remarks had been misrepresented, he said there was a "witch-hunt" against right-wing figures, aiming to characterise them as racist or fascist.
That is a rather inaccurate take on the situation to say the least. It makes it sound like he was just doing what lots of people caught out complain about, when the reality was he was stitched up when his actual words were revealed.
Yes, it is a fact that he was misinterpreted, not an opinion.
It's so hard to separate cause and effect, because economic success attracts and engenders a certain bundle of attitudes, and vice versa. One possible way to break this cycle is to observe that most of the winner-towns of the 21st century have easy access to an international airport. Of course airlines serve thriving areas better, but building the airport in the first place is costly. So this access to global cities and markets seems to be important. What a low-carbon future means is uncertain. It should equalise outcomes, but other technologies like teleworking have not equalised economic success across different areas, even when they look like prime candidates to have done so.
Yes, building the airport is costly. And then persuading airlines to use you regional airport is hard. (Well, Ryanair will fly to Malaga, but other than that...)
Look at Manchester: it has the second biggest airport in the UK by traffic volume.
And BA has - over the past two decades - essentially cut all long haul from it. You can fly Emirates to Dubai (and in an A380 too), but for anywhere else, you're basically SoL.
This is a much worse situation than France, where Paris, Nice and Lyon all have long-haul. In Germany, there must be half a dozen airports with long-haul.
In the US, local municipalities typically subsidise airports, recognising the economic benefits that come from better connectivity.
This is sick. I realise there is considerable interest in their fate but they are still people and betting on their divorce is distasteful.
They were betting on whether Dave had stuck his cock in a pigs head. Not sure there is anything thst is more distasteful.than that. They will be betting on who Boris shags next...
This is sick. I realise there is considerable interest in their fate but they are still people and betting on their divorce is distasteful.
They were betting on whether Dave had stuck his cock in a pigs head. Not sure there is anything thst is more distasteful.than that. They will be betting on who Boris shags next...
Labour's best electoral future seemingly is taking all the good parts of the 2017 manifesto and then junking what made it all go wrong in 2019.
Try the 1997 manifesto and you might be on to something. Make sure you are seen to expel hundreds of Anti-semites and Momentum/Militant activists too. And learn to do aspiration. Nobody will vote for a party that promises to punish those a little wealthier than they are because ay heart they aspire to be there themselves.
Labour's really big problem is that those who traditionally voted for them, unthinking in that because they were supporting the party of the working man, have stopped doing so. And they have stopped doing so because of non-delivery by Labour.
This is not just about Corbyn losing two elections and being unable to deliver his Marxist manifesto. It is because their former voters have simply seen through Labour. Both national and local Labour governance has not made their lives materially better. And once out there, that genie is not getting back in the bottle.
I think the big anti- Labour swing in their heartland areas in 2019 is likely to have been Brexit and Corbyn specific in terms of its scale. How much of that will be reversed when both factors cease to be relevant remains to be seen. The traffic is not ,however, one way. When Portillo lost Enfield Southgate to Labour in 1997 , it was rather assumed that such seats were only winnable for Labour in landslide years. I never expected to see Labour win such seats in a year when the Tories enjoyed a national majority of 80! Ditto for Hove on the South Coast. In the latter seat, I recall a lost Labour deposit at the November 1973 by election.. The same happened at the December 1984 Southgate by election when Portillo was first elected.
Sir Roger was at the centre of controversy last year when he was dismissed from, then reinstated to, an unpaid role as a government housing advisor after criticism of his comments about China and Muslim immigrants.
After he was restored to the role when supporters said his remarks had been misrepresented, he said there was a "witch-hunt" against right-wing figures, aiming to characterise them as racist or fascist.
That is a rather inaccurate take on the situation to say the least. It makes it sound like he was just doing what lots of people caught out complain about, when the reality was he was stitched up when his actual words were revealed.
Yes, it is a fact that he was misinterpreted, not an opinion.
That quote about a lie spreading half way around the world and all that....the BBC are still reporting it in his obituary, with no link to the real story, only the initial fall out.
I have a theory that when areas trend Lab or Tory, it is for different reasons.
Brighton is a liberal hotspot attracting incomers. Because of this house prices go up and people who can't afford to live in Brighton moved to Hove which has now become like Brighton. In turn people who can't afford to live in Hove are moving to East Worthing and Shoreham which is going the same way (e.g. this seat voted for Brexit but only had a very small swing to the Tories in 2019). Effectively liberal seats cluster together. Another good example is Chingford which is moving towards Lab as people who are priced out of Hackney move in.
In terms of seats trending Con, I would argue that in places like Bassetlaw, there is not much movement of people into the seat. Instead the change is driven more by the existing population changing their political views e.g. traditional allegiences to Lab dying off. While this has sped up in the last 2 elections, it is easy to see that the change started some time before that. I would argue that some of the change over time is due to gradual acceptability of not voting Lab / voting Ukip/Brexit/Con - essentially if your friends stop voting Labour it is easier to make the change as well.
Whilst I disagreed with him on many things, his activities during the Cold War (which did not come to light until later) did speak well of him, and is a rare example of somebody with money and reputation quietly doing a good thing to the betterment of others.
Whilst I disagreed with him on many things, his activities during the Cold War (which did not come to light until later) did speak well of him, and is a rare example of somebody with money and reputation quietly doing a good thing to the betterment of others.
Yes - he was genuinely brave and actually walked the walk not simply talked about helping.
Labour's best electoral future seemingly is taking all the good parts of the 2017 manifesto and then junking what made it all go wrong in 2019.
The leader and Brexit were two massive issues and are now gone, so if they pick Starmer, Nandy or Phillips they're probably in the best position they possibly can be in.
I think it grossly understates the problems they face to say, essentially, dust down the 2017 manifesto and be less grumpy than Corbyn.
They have just heavily lost an election where the fundamentals were actually pretty good for them - relatively unpopular Tory leader, divided party of government which had failed in its key objective, national crisis, and insipid economy.
They don't look anywhere close to being a Government in waiting. They need a heavy injection of discipline, a complete change in electoral strategy, a new internal culture and language, an agenda which is looks serious rather than freebie-driven, a strategy to deal with Scotland. It's a huge, huge task for Starmer or anyone else.
I don't disagree with the analysis you've made - but I do think if you are to look at Labour's performance in the 2010s, the 2017 performance was the best and hence it logically makes sense to see what did work that year and what didn't.
My point is that Labour could be in a much worse position if it chooses RLB or ET, at least with Starmer he'll be pragmatic enough to move the party as needed.
I wouldn't write them off yet, just 15 years ago the Tories were seemingly dead and buried.
The last line is incorrect. The Tories were in far better shape 15 years ago than Labour is now. The Populus poll in January 2005 (i.e. exactly 15 years ago) showed Lab 38% Con 33%. At the May 2005 General Election, the Tony Blair Labour government managed a majority of just 3% over Michael Howard's Tories.
Labour's position is much closer to the Tories' situation at the 1997 General Election. In 1997, Tony Blair's Labour was at 43% with a John Major-led Tory Party at 31%. The respective figures are now almost the same, but in reverse (44% v 32%). This suggests it will be a lot more than 15 years before Labour achieves a solid working majority.
The Tories got 32% in 2005 too to be fair but had a working majority 10 years later
And, indeed, took over the government (as head of a coalition) just five years after getting just 32%.
It is Project Vertias jobbie, so caveat emptor. More often than not they have got some staffers on secret camera after 3 too many drinks and spliced together the worst bits without context.
Iranian civilians are being shot dead in Tehran. Not looking good.
I am starting to wonder if the Iranian government is about implode. It looks as though Soleimani may have been even more important in keeping things going than everybody thought. Certainly they are currently giving every sign of being both in total disarray and an advanced state of panic. Shooting student protestors was the last mistake the Shah made and the proximate cause of the Iranian revolution of 1979 - a fact that should give Khamenei pause for thought.
Perhaps one thing we should remember is he was one of the comparatively few government ministers who was middle-aged rather than geriatric.
It would be more than slightly ironic if one of Trump's crazy moments actually caused the collapse of one of the most dangerous governments in the middle east - although whether it would improve matters would depend on what replaced it.
Living in Los Angeles, I know a lot of Persians / Iranians.
Their view is that Tehran is (largely) a Western liberal city, where women expect to be educated, and where the regime is unpopular.
Outside of Tehran, Iran is a much more conservative, Islamist place, where women's education is actively blocked.
Their view is that the regime wouldn't last a week if Iran was just Tehran. But they also recognise that city folk, with their loose morals, aren't that popular in the countryside.
If the regime does fall, it's probably going to result in a significant drop in world oil production (Iran is c. 4%), which is great for Russia, Texas and Alberta, but not great for the UK, Japan, South Korea or the EU.
It's so hard to separate cause and effect, because economic success attracts and engenders a certain bundle of attitudes, and vice versa. One possible way to break this cycle is to observe that most of the winner-towns of the 21st century have easy access to an international airport. Of course airlines serve thriving areas better, but building the airport in the first place is costly. So this access to global cities and markets seems to be important. What a low-carbon future means is uncertain. It should equalise outcomes, but other technologies like teleworking have not equalised economic success across different areas, even when they look like prime candidates to have done so.
In the US, local municipalities typically subsidise airports, recognising the economic benefits that come from better connectivity.
It's also much more important for internal administration, of course, which is one difference between there and the UK.
I wonder how many MPs fly to/from their constituencies. Surely all the NI members and everyone north of the Central Belt.
It's so hard to separate cause and effect, because economic success attracts and engenders a certain bundle of attitudes, and vice versa. One possible way to break this cycle is to observe that most of the winner-towns of the 21st century have easy access to an international airport. Of course airlines serve thriving areas better, but building the airport in the first place is costly. So this access to global cities and markets seems to be important. What a low-carbon future means is uncertain. It should equalise outcomes, but other technologies like teleworking have not equalised economic success across different areas, even when they look like prime candidates to have done so.
In the US, local municipalities typically subsidise airports, recognising the economic benefits that come from better connectivity.
It's also much more important for internal administration, of course, which is one difference between there and the UK.
I wonder how many MPs fly to/from their constituencies. Surely all the NI members and everyone north of the Central Belt.
Yes, the distances in the US practically mandate everywhere has a decent airport.
Separately... If I were an MP in Cornwall, I'd probably fly to Newquay.
I have a theory that when areas trend Lab or Tory, it is for different reasons.
Brighton is a liberal hotspot attracting incomers. Because of this house prices go up and people who can't afford to live in Brighton moved to Hove which has now become like Brighton. In turn people who can't afford to live in Hove are moving to East Worthing and Shoreham which is going the same way (e.g. this seat voted for Brexit but only had a very small swing to the Tories in 2019). Effectively liberal seats cluster together. Another good example is Chingford which is moving towards Lab as people who are priced out of Hackney move in.
In terms of seats trending Con, I would argue that in places like Bassetlaw, there is not much movement of people into the seat. Instead the change is driven more by the existing population changing their political views e.g. traditional allegiences to Lab dying off. While this has sped up in the last 2 elections, it is easy to see that the change started some time before that. I would argue that some of the change over time is due to gradual acceptability of not voting Lab / voting Ukip/Brexit/Con - essentially if your friends stop voting Labour it is easier to make the change as well.
I'm not familiar with Bassetlaw, but isn't it likely that the residual population will become more conservative as young people leave for university and rarely return? Tory advocates of boundary reform might like to consider this before rushing in.
Flybe, Europe’s biggest regional airline, was locked in survival talks on Sunday night less than a year after being bailed out by a Virgin Atlantic-led consortium.
Sky News can exclusively reveal that Flybe, which handles over half of Britain's domestic flights outside London, has been trying to secure additional financing amid mounting losses.
This is all getting very nasty. Who knows who is briefing against who, but clearly the relationship between the Firm and Harry / Meghan has broken down.
It's so hard to separate cause and effect, because economic success attracts and engenders a certain bundle of attitudes, and vice versa. One possible way to break this cycle is to observe that most of the winner-towns of the 21st century have easy access to an international airport. Of course airlines serve thriving areas better, but building the airport in the first place is costly. So this access to global cities and markets seems to be important. What a low-carbon future means is uncertain. It should equalise outcomes, but other technologies like teleworking have not equalised economic success across different areas, even when they look like prime candidates to have done so.
In the US, local municipalities typically subsidise airports, recognising the economic benefits that come from better connectivity.
It's also much more important for internal administration, of course, which is one difference between there and the UK.
I wonder how many MPs fly to/from their constituencies. Surely all the NI members and everyone north of the Central Belt.
Yes, the distances in the US practically mandate everywhere has a decent airport.
Separately... If I were an MP in Cornwall, I'd probably fly to Newquay.
Navy 1) Get more planes for the carriers. The F35B is the only plane that can use them, but they're hideously expensive and we don't have enough of them. So either buy more or um, do something:
This is the type of hardware focused thinking that has got us in the shit we're in. You can have as many jets on the deck as you want and it makes no difference if there is no crew. The F-35B purchasing schedule is deliberately paced to match the derisory output of trained pilots from the catastrophically privatised training system.
It now takes 8 years for a new pilot to get to their first operational squadron. In my day it took 3. This has another unfortunate effect in that is raises the average age of crew into the range were they have families and are therefore not keen on out-of-area deployments. This hurts retention which worsens the crew shortage even more...
This is all getting very nasty. Who knows who is briefing against who, but clearly the relationship between the Firm and Harry / Meghan has broken down.
Is it true that Meghan has prevented her seriously ill dad from seeing baby Archie?
I think the big anti- Labour swing in their heartland areas in 2019 is likely to have been Brexit and Corbyn specific in terms of its scale. How much of that will be reversed when both factors cease to be relevant remains to be seen.
One of those two factors certainly won't cease to be relevant if the successor is someone self-defined as the continuity candidate after giving Corbyn 10 out of 10 and who will be forever reminded of that should she win.
The task is huge and there has to be a palpable change of direction. We're starting from a situation where Labour is 178 seats behind the Conservatives' tally, based on the notional results in 600 seats of the delayed boundary changes (cf Electoral Calculus). To put that in perspective, after 1992 we were 65 seats behind out of 650 seats.
I am not completely pessimistic because there is the prospect of a number of disparate factors at work, but it probably requires all to come into conjuction at once i.e. - The Tories failing to deliver on the very high expectations they raised - Johnson coming to be seen as a combination of a charlatan and buffoon by the very people who backed him - The EU ceasing to be an issue of major political importance and Labour ceasing to try and make it one - Labour being led by someone who is seen to make a decisive break with the last 4 years whilst keeping all wings together with a renewed sense of party unity as a broad church - Unforeseen events and luck, generally.
Flybe, Europe’s biggest regional airline, was locked in survival talks on Sunday night less than a year after being bailed out by a Virgin Atlantic-led consortium.
Sky News can exclusively reveal that Flybe, which handles over half of Britain's domestic flights outside London, has been trying to secure additional financing amid mounting losses.
Flybe provided excellent service from Cardiff with their Embraer fleet, which were always full. The routes have been cut and only Bombardier Dash 600s are in use. I no longer use Flybe, I fly easyJet from Bristol for work.
This is all getting very nasty. Who knows who is briefing against who, but clearly the relationship between the Firm and Harry / Meghan has broken down.
Are H and Meg actually trying to blackmail the Queen?
Navy 1) Get more planes for the carriers. The F35B is the only plane that can use them, but they're hideously expensive and we don't have enough of them. So either buy more or um, do something:
This is the type of hardware focused thinking that has got us in the shit we're in. You can have as many jets on the deck as you want and it makes no difference if there is no crew. The F-35B purchasing schedule is deliberately paced to match the derisory output of trained pilots from the catastrophically privatised training system.
It now takes 8 years for a new pilot to get to their first operational squadron. In my day it took 3. This has another unfortunate effect in that is raises the average age of crew into the range were they have families and are therefore not keen on out-of-area deployments. This hurts retention which worsens the crew shortage even more...
Fair enough. Consider the statement modified to include "...and all people trained adequately and quicker..." and "...all equipment upgraded to the latest variant..." and "...all availability rates to be 80% or over..." and "...all activities to be frequently rehearsed via exercises..." and so on. But I didn't want to swamp the OP.
This is all getting very nasty. Who knows who is briefing against who, but clearly the relationship between the Firm and Harry / Meghan has broken down.
Are H and Meg actually trying to blackmail the Queen?
"Sometimes I get the feeling people think I don't love my daughter. I do love her very much," he said. "I would love nothing more than to put a picture of Archie in a frame and place it beside the one of Meghan."
I have a theory that when areas trend Lab or Tory, it is for different reasons.
Brighton is a liberal hotspot attracting incomers. Because of this house prices go up and people who can't afford to live in Brighton moved to Hove which has now become like Brighton. In turn people who can't afford to live in Hove are moving to East Worthing and Shoreham which is going the same way (e.g. this seat voted for Brexit but only had a very small swing to the Tories in 2019). Effectively liberal seats cluster together. Another good example is Chingford which is moving towards Lab as people who are priced out of Hackney move in.
In terms of seats trending Con, I would argue that in places like Bassetlaw, there is not much movement of people into the seat. Instead the change is driven more by the existing population changing their political views e.g. traditional allegiences to Lab dying off. While this has sped up in the last 2 elections, it is easy to see that the change started some time before that. I would argue that some of the change over time is due to gradual acceptability of not voting Lab / voting Ukip/Brexit/Con - essentially if your friends stop voting Labour it is easier to make the change as well.
I'm not familiar with Bassetlaw, but isn't it likely that the residual population will become more conservative as young people leave for university and rarely return? Tory advocates of boundary reform might like to consider this before rushing in.
Change in age profile in places (simplistically, young people leaving Smalltown and never coming back) seems to be part of the story;
It's so hard to separate cause and effect, because economic success attracts and engenders a certain bundle of attitudes, and vice versa. One possible way to break this cycle is to observe that most of the winner-towns of the 21st century have easy access to an international airport. Of course airlines serve thriving areas better, but building the airport in the first place is costly. So this access to global cities and markets seems to be important. What a low-carbon future means is uncertain. It should equalise outcomes, but other technologies like teleworking have not equalised economic success across different areas, even when they look like prime candidates to have done so.
In the US, local municipalities typically subsidise airports, recognising the economic benefits that come from better connectivity.
It's also much more important for internal administration, of course, which is one difference between there and the UK.
I wonder how many MPs fly to/from their constituencies. Surely all the NI members and everyone north of the Central Belt.
Yes, the distances in the US practically mandate everywhere has a decent airport.
Separately... If I were an MP in Cornwall, I'd probably fly to Newquay.
I have a theory that when areas trend Lab or Tory, it is for different reasons.
Brighton is a liberal hotspot attracting incomers. Because of this house prices go up and people who can't afford to live in Brighton moved to Hove which has now become like Brighton. In turn people who can't afford to live in Hove are moving to East Worthing and Shoreham which is going the same way (e.g. this seat voted for Brexit but only had a very small swing to the Tories in 2019). Effectively liberal seats cluster together. Another good example is Chingford which is moving towards Lab as people who are priced out of Hackney move in.
In terms of seats trending Con, I would argue that in places like Bassetlaw, there is not much movement of people into the seat. Instead the change is driven more by the existing population changing their political views e.g. traditional allegiences to Lab dying off. While this has sped up in the last 2 elections, it is easy to see that the change started some time before that. I would argue that some of the change over time is due to gradual acceptability of not voting Lab / voting Ukip/Brexit/Con - essentially if your friends stop voting Labour it is easier to make the change as well.
I'm not familiar with Bassetlaw, but isn't it likely that the residual population will become more conservative as young people leave for university and rarely return? Tory advocates of boundary reform might like to consider this before rushing in.
Motorway constituencies such as Bassetlaw are seeing significant house building.
So while they might lose people in the 18-24 age group they will gain in young families looking for affordable housing and without the stresses of urban life.
Comments
I can't dislike someone I don't know.
Perhaps one thing we should remember is he was one of the comparatively few government ministers who was middle-aged rather than geriatric.
It would be more than slightly ironic if one of Trump's crazy moments actually caused the collapse of one of the most dangerous governments in the middle east - although whether it would improve matters would depend on what replaced it.
On that basis, Labour in 1987 had 154 seats, compared to 180 now.
I have just reminded myself of the Scotland popular vote in 2019. I hadn't appreciated that the Conservatives got 180,000 more votes in Scotland than Labour and that they were ahead in the vote share by 25% to 18%. There's a very long way for Labour to go in Scotland ...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-51084248
This is not just about Corbyn losing two elections and being unable to deliver his Marxist manifesto. It is because their former voters have simply seen through Labour. Both national and local Labour governance has not made their lives materially better. And once out there, that genie is not getting back in the bottle.
I wonder if he will be getting more champagne in: https://spectator.imgix.net/content/uploads/2019/04/IMG-5190.jpg
Looking at his Wiki entry I have taught in one or more of the labs where he studied Physics.
After he was restored to the role when supporters said his remarks had been misrepresented, he said there was a "witch-hunt" against right-wing figures, aiming to characterise them as racist or fascist.
That is a rather inaccurate take on the situation to say the least. It makes it sound like he was just doing what lots of people caught out complain about, when the reality was he was stitched up when his actual words were revealed.
Look at Manchester: it has the second biggest airport in the UK by traffic volume.
And BA has - over the past two decades - essentially cut all long haul from it. You can fly Emirates to Dubai (and in an A380 too), but for anywhere else, you're basically SoL.
This is a much worse situation than France, where Paris, Nice and Lyon all have long-haul. In Germany, there must be half a dozen airports with long-haul.
In the US, local municipalities typically subsidise airports, recognising the economic benefits that come from better connectivity.
The traffic is not ,however, one way. When Portillo lost Enfield Southgate to Labour in 1997 , it was rather assumed that such seats were only winnable for Labour in landslide years. I never expected to see Labour win such seats in a year when the Tories enjoyed a national majority of 80! Ditto for Hove on the South Coast. In the latter seat, I recall a lost Labour deposit at the November 1973 by election.. The same happened at the December 1984 Southgate by election when Portillo was first elected.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2020/01/roger-scruton-a-man-who-seemed-bigger-than-the-age/
Brighton is a liberal hotspot attracting incomers. Because of this house prices go up and people who can't afford to live in Brighton moved to Hove which has now become like Brighton. In turn people who can't afford to live in Hove are moving to East Worthing and Shoreham which is going the same way (e.g. this seat voted for Brexit but only had a very small swing to the Tories in 2019). Effectively liberal seats cluster together. Another good example is Chingford which is moving towards Lab as people who are priced out of Hackney move in.
In terms of seats trending Con, I would argue that in places like Bassetlaw, there is not much movement of people into the seat. Instead the change is driven more by the existing population changing their political views e.g. traditional allegiences to Lab dying off. While this has sped up in the last 2 elections, it is easy to see that the change started some time before that. I would argue that some of the change over time is due to gradual acceptability of not voting Lab / voting Ukip/Brexit/Con - essentially if your friends stop voting Labour it is easier to make the change as well.
Good night.
??? or were they just ham fisted?
It seems the defensive teams did not turn up.
Boris hits out at Trump over the nuclear deal with Iran in a joint statement issued this evening with Macron and Merkel
It is Project Vertias jobbie, so caveat emptor. More often than not they have got some staffers on secret camera after 3 too many drinks and spliced together the worst bits without context.
Their view is that Tehran is (largely) a Western liberal city, where women expect to be educated, and where the regime is unpopular.
Outside of Tehran, Iran is a much more conservative, Islamist place, where women's education is actively blocked.
Their view is that the regime wouldn't last a week if Iran was just Tehran. But they also recognise that city folk, with their loose morals, aren't that popular in the countryside.
If the regime does fall, it's probably going to result in a significant drop in world oil production (Iran is c. 4%), which is great for Russia, Texas and Alberta, but not great for the UK, Japan, South Korea or the EU.
I wonder how many MPs fly to/from their constituencies. Surely all the NI members and everyone north of the Central Belt.
Wayne Warren defeats Jim Williams 7-4 in the BDO world darts championship to become the oldest winner in history.
Joe Perry defeated Ding Junhui earlier to book his place in the quarter final of the Snooker Masters.
Mark Selby Vs Ali Carter is currently 4-4 (first to six).
Separately... If I were an MP in Cornwall, I'd probably fly to Newquay.
Although, that final was a high standard.
Sky News can exclusively reveal that Flybe, which handles over half of Britain's domestic flights outside London, has been trying to secure additional financing amid mounting losses.
https://news.sky.com/story/regional-airline-flybe-in-frantic-bid-to-stave-off-collapse-11907407
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2020/01/12/buckingham-palace-fears-sussexes-could-go-public-damaging-accusations/
This is all getting very nasty. Who knows who is briefing against who, but clearly the relationship between the Firm and Harry / Meghan has broken down.
It now takes 8 years for a new pilot to get to their first operational squadron. In my day it took 3. This has another unfortunate effect in that is raises the average age of crew into the range were they have families and are therefore not keen on out-of-area deployments. This hurts retention which worsens the crew shortage even more...
The task is huge and there has to be a palpable change of direction. We're starting from a situation where Labour is 178 seats behind the Conservatives' tally, based on the notional results in 600 seats of the delayed boundary changes (cf Electoral Calculus). To put that in perspective, after 1992 we were 65 seats behind out of 650 seats.
I am not completely pessimistic because there is the prospect of a number of disparate factors at work, but it probably requires all to come into conjuction at once i.e.
- The Tories failing to deliver on the very high expectations they raised
- Johnson coming to be seen as a combination of a charlatan and buffoon by the very people who backed him
- The EU ceasing to be an issue of major political importance and Labour ceasing to try and make it one
- Labour being led by someone who is seen to make a decisive break with the last 4 years whilst keeping all wings together with a renewed sense of party unity as a broad church
- Unforeseen events and luck, generally.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/celebrities/2019/09/03/duchess-meghan-dad-thomas-markle-begs-reconnect-meet-baby-archie/2195683001/
https://www.citymetric.com/politics/how-age-and-economics-explains-why-northern-seats-workington-are-turning-tory-4879
New Thread
https://twitter.com/theo_merz/status/1216344088020226048?s=20
https://mobile.twitter.com/EuropeElects/status/1216329262715809793
So while they might lose people in the 18-24 age group they will gain in young families looking for affordable housing and without the stresses of urban life.