No Sir Graham Brady or Chris Green on that letter.
But I reckon that's six Lab gains in the bag as a minimum.
Please can we have the seat names and we can look at their majorities?
Heywood & Middleton = Tory majority of 663.
Bolton NE = Tory majority of 378
Leigh = Tory majority of 1,965
Bury South = Tory majority of 402
Bury North = Tory majority of 105
Cheadle = Tory majority of 2,336.
That’s 6 MPs worried about their jobs.
Think they've already lost them tbh, Labour would have to do incredibly badly to not get those back. I suspect "not Corbyn" has enough votes in it alone.
Middle Income Jobs....£110k a year...Is Andy a PB regular, where £100k a year seems to be about middle income for regular posters. It reminds me when Tuscan Polly tried to claim she wasn't really paid that much.
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris
I have the greatest respect for you HYUFD but there is little chance the Tories go anywhere but backwards in London, even in 2019 under Corbyn they gained a seat there
The comparison would be election 1992, with Sunak as Major and Boris as Thatcher, No Deal his Poll Tax and Starmer as Kinnock.
Many current Tory seats in the North and Wales and Midlands were won by Kinnock in 1992 but lots of London seats and a few southern seats like St Albans and Canterbury and Oxford West and Abingdon were won by Major in that same election
Why do you think the Tories are going to become more popular in London with literally any leader, especially one that is pro-Brexit? Please clarify why the Tories would gain Battersea, it's one of the few seats I know of trending consistently to Labour.
Cummings and Milne are both Putin pawns. One down, one to go, then we can turn this country around and start to head back towards the shores of normality.
You have to wonder why in normal times London is getting £700m per year in subsidy for the public transport network.
London has just over 3 times the population of Manchester.
Does Manchester get £230m / year subsidy for the public transport ?
Does it bollocks.
Metrolink has to break even and the buses are privatised.
I would increase funding for all councils and public transport networks, not cut London's.
London's is still absolutely minimal compared to any other comparable network abroad
Agreed
100%
But the southern media, southern government with no power in the north none of this will ever change.
But it explains the huge divide in this country.
It is not the south who have power, it is a tiny clique of Eton aristocrats, landed gentry, Russian bought business/politicos and their friends and hangers on. We live in a kleptocracy.
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris.
Sunak would also make the necessary compromises with the EU for a FTA most likely Boris would not eg on state aid
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris.
Sunak would also make the necessary compromises with the EU for a FTA most likely Boris would not eg on state aid
I sense your loyalty has shifted from Johnson to Sunak @HYUFD
Sunak needs to throw Johnson under the bus sooner rather than later. Sunak's window of opportunity is closing fast, by Christmas he will be neck deep in economic ordure.
Middle Income Jobs....£110k a year...Is Andy a PB regular, where £100k a year seems to be about middle income for regular posters. It reminds me when Tuscan Polly tried to claim she wasn't really paid that much.
Okay call me a Labour fanboy but I think he was trying to say that he agreed with the idea that people on middle income jobs could live on 2/3rds wages?
Khan was on track to run a surplus in a few years without this grant, before COVID. He was a lot more economically competent than Johnson ever was.
Of course we can forget how much of TfL is covered by fares compared to every other country and this would still be nowhere close to that - Tories should be proud
All of London's Mayors have done something to improve TfL. Given who we've had I think this shows that there was a lot of low hanging fruit to be snapped up in order to do so, and oddly I think that somehow the London Mayor job actually makes them work.
TfL today is quite good - there's some hint of a clean, efficient, and good service. The staff rightly have some degree of pride in it. There's more that could be done though and they're sitting on the transport equivalent of a gold-mine. Good management could potentially make TfL profitable in my view given the simply wonderful (and to TfL free) locations and routes in the network.
I don't think for one moment that Khan is the key factor at work here, and if you'll forgive me CHB I see him as worse than Boris, but having a London Mayor, and the most obvious result of that being transport is.
Why would the Government want responsibility for running TfL? Every time the Northern line goes down, the buck would stop with the DfT.
Kahn would be able to turbo charge his victim status, and get in the standard every week attacking the government for f-ing things up and the inevitable strikes.
Might not be the worst thing in the world for the mayoralty actually, if the DfT is able to go full austerity and cut costs to the bone (and take the inevitable industrial action) with the cover of an 80 seat tory majority. Then a future labour gov can devolve a profitable organisation back to the GLA.
Chris Grayling has transport expertise and is available to run London Transport.
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris
I have the greatest respect for you HYUFD but there is little chance the Tories go anywhere but backwards in London, even in 2019 under Corbyn they gained a seat there
The comparison would be election 1992, with Sunak as Major and Boris as Thatcher, No Deal his Poll Tax and Starmer as Kinnock.
Many current Tory seats in the North and Wales and Midlands were won by Kinnock in 1992 but lots of London seats and a few southern seats like St Albans and Canterbury and Oxford West and Abingdon were won by Major in that same election
Why do you think the Tories are going to become more popular in London with literally any leader, especially one that is pro-Brexit? Please clarify why the Tories would gain Battersea, it's one of the few seats I know of trending consistently to Labour.
Cameron won Battersea twice so Sunak certainly could if he got a trade deal with the EU
Khan was on track to run a surplus in a few years without this grant, before COVID. He was a lot more economically competent than Johnson ever was.
Of course we can forget how much of TfL is covered by fares compared to every other country and this would still be nowhere close to that - Tories should be proud
All of London's Mayors have done something to improve TfL. Given who we've had I think this shows that there was a lot of low hanging fruit to be snapped up in order to do so, and oddly I think that somehow the London Mayor job actually makes them work.
TfL today is quite good - there's some hint of a clean, efficient, and good service. The staff rightly have some degree of pride in it. There's more that could be done though and they're sitting on the transport equivalent of a gold-mine. Good management could potentially make TfL profitable in my view given the simply wonderful (and to TfL free) locations and routes in the network.
I don't think for one moment that Khan is the key factor at work here, and if you'll forgive me CHB I see him as worse than Boris, but having a London Mayor, and the most obvious result of that being transport is.
That's ok, I can respect people thinking Khan isn't good, I think he's a 6/10 at best.
Middle Income Jobs....£110k a year...Is Andy a PB regular, where £100k a year seems to be about middle income for regular posters. It reminds me when Tuscan Polly tried to claim she wasn't really paid that much.
Okay call me a Labour fanboy but I think he was trying to say that he agreed with the idea that people on middle income jobs could live on 2/3rds wages?
"Can live on 2/3 of our wages", he was definitely including his own job as middle income.
They needed to do that in Manchester if they didn't want to settle (although that should have). Can they afford to negotiate like that with every council they want to put in tier 3? (they're starting to look at places with slightly lower case rates though, whose highest localised rates have traveled less fat from the student villages which are now settling somewhat).
Negotiating with all also restricts you somewhat to doing it by area - county or mayoralty. Glossopdale in High Peak has a case rate near 400, feeds almost entirely into GM's hospitals and yet is not tier 3'd because they're not on Burnham's patch.
Ironic to urge government to get a grip on a thread about their autocratic tendencies.
TfL is fine, it has/had terrible overcrowding but I can't really blame them for that, I always thought the service was immensely better than South Western Failway myself
Why would voters blame Khan if central govt takes responsibility for it? I just dont get it? Surely neither party should want responsibility for TfL at the moment?
The Tory approach to London seems to be that Londoners are idiots and will vote Khan out because it's his fault.
Problem is that the Tories are so unpopular in London already and they're going backwards. And Bailey is hopeless.
Even in 2019 Labour didn't really go backwards in London, there's simply no way the Tories make any progress there in 2024. I bet there are good odds on Labour/Lib Dev gains in London
If the ridership on TfL is permanently reduced by home working and people moving out of Central London in consequence, then who should pay the increase in the difference between fares and operational costs?
MY understanding is that the biggest crash in income is in annual tickets - that used to be a nice, reliable source of income for TfL.... Multi month ones as well.....
Well it's going to end up being the taxpayer unless you support privatising TfL where it will inevitably go bust and cost more anyway.
But my question remains, why would Londoners blame Khan for that?
I have little or no interest in what politician gets the blame.
The question is - in the long run, who pays?
Who should pay for trains very 5 minutes on the District Line*? And why?
*It's great for me - I live very close, but not too close, to a station on the District line. Zone 2 and all.....
Sir Geoff aint wrong about the quality of BBC cricket commentary. The live T20 on the telly they did was total wank. Despite exciting play going on they were discussing where they got their outfits and what their kids had been up to during the lockdown. They were totally clueless about T20 strategy. The only one with current T20 insight, Tymal Mills, got all of about 2 mins air time.
I like Nandy, but I'm disappointed she has to reach for the Thatcher reference, which in political discourse is a sure sign of laziness. I get why - even Thatcher was not so horrid - but I think it adds nothing that couldn't have been achieved without throwing in reference to an 80s bogeywoman.
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris
I have the greatest respect for you HYUFD but there is little chance the Tories go anywhere but backwards in London, even in 2019 under Corbyn they gained a seat there
The comparison would be election 1992, with Sunak as Major and Boris as Thatcher, No Deal his Poll Tax and Starmer as Kinnock.
Many current Tory seats in the North and Wales and Midlands were won by Kinnock in 1992 but lots of London Labour seats and a few southern Labour and LD seats like St Albans and Canterbury and Oxford West and Abingdon were won by Major in that same election
The Remainer South are not going to fall in line behind a pro-austerity Brexiteer. Remember Johnson is the natural cash spaffer, not Sunak.
If you are assuming Sunak loses the marginals in Wales, the North and the Midlands, you might be in a spot of bother.
Why would voters blame Khan if central govt takes responsibility for it? I just dont get it? Surely neither party should want responsibility for TfL at the moment?
The Tory approach to London seems to be that Londoners are idiots and will vote Khan out because it's his fault.
Problem is that the Tories are so unpopular in London already and they're going backwards. And Bailey is hopeless.
Even in 2019 Labour didn't really go backwards in London, there's simply no way the Tories make any progress there in 2024. I bet there are good odds on Labour/Lib Dev gains in London
If the ridership on TfL is permanently reduced by home working and people moving out of Central London in consequence, then who should pay the increase in the difference between fares and operational costs?
MY understanding is that the biggest crash in income is in annual tickets - that used to be a nice, reliable source of income for TfL.... Multi month ones as well.....
Well it's going to end up being the taxpayer unless you support privatising TfL where it will inevitably go bust and cost more anyway.
But my question remains, why would Londoners blame Khan for that?
I have little or no interest in what politician gets the blame.
The question is - in the long run, who pays?
Who should pay for trains very 5 minutes on the District Line? And why?
We should all pay for transport across the country, it's a public service.
So hence I said, increase funding elsewhere, not cut that in London.
You have to wonder why in normal times London is getting £700m per year in subsidy for the public transport network.
London has just over 3 times the population of Manchester.
Does Manchester get £230m / year subsidy for the public transport ?
Does it bollocks.
Metrolink has to break even and the buses are privatised.
What’s the ridership London vs Manchester? Genuine question, I assume London’s is proportionally higher because of the huge amount of people who pass through London, either commuting from outside the boundary or just en route to somewhere else. All railways lead to London, after all.
Been spotting Betfair stupidity. In both the Alaska and Arkansas Senate race they have it as a Republican vs Dem match up. In neither state is a Democrat running. In Alaska the Republican is facing an Independent. In Arkansas Tom Cotton is facing a Libertarian opponent.
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris
I have the greatest respect for you HYUFD but there is little chance the Tories go anywhere but backwards in London, even in 2019 under Corbyn they gained a seat there
The comparison would be election 1992, with Sunak as Major and Boris as Thatcher, No Deal his Poll Tax and Starmer as Kinnock.
Many current Tory seats in the North and Wales and Midlands were won by Kinnock in 1992 but lots of London Labour seats and a few southern Labour and LD seats like St Albans and Canterbury and Oxford West and Abingdon were won by Major in that same election
The Remainer South are not going to fall in line behind an pro-austerity Bresiteer. Remember Johnson is the natural cash spaffer, not Sunak.
If you are assuming Sunak loses the marginals in Wales, the North and the Midlands, you might be in a spot of bother.
The Tories aren't popular in London, even Corbyn didn't get destroyed there in 2019. The idea they will go backwards under Remain Starmer is for the birds!
You have to wonder why in normal times London is getting £700m per year in subsidy for the public transport network.
London has just over 3 times the population of Manchester.
Does Manchester get £230m / year subsidy for the public transport ?
Does it bollocks.
Metrolink has to break even and the buses are privatised.
I would increase funding for all councils and public transport networks, not cut London's.
London's is still absolutely minimal compared to any other comparable network abroad
Agreed
100%
But the southern media, southern government with no power in the north none of this will ever change.
But it explains the huge divide in this country.
The Manchester bus network should have been re-regulated decades ago. Deregulation outside London has been a disaster. Even Mrs T didn’t deregulate London’s buses and subsequently it now has by far the best network in the country, and one of the best in the world.
Why would voters blame Khan if central govt takes responsibility for it? I just dont get it? Surely neither party should want responsibility for TfL at the moment?
The Tory approach to London seems to be that Londoners are idiots and will vote Khan out because it's his fault.
Problem is that the Tories are so unpopular in London already and they're going backwards. And Bailey is hopeless.
Even in 2019 Labour didn't really go backwards in London, there's simply no way the Tories make any progress there in 2024. I bet there are good odds on Labour/Lib Dev gains in London
If the ridership on TfL is permanently reduced by home working and people moving out of Central London in consequence, then who should pay the increase in the difference between fares and operational costs?
MY understanding is that the biggest crash in income is in annual tickets - that used to be a nice, reliable source of income for TfL.... Multi month ones as well.....
Well it's going to end up being the taxpayer unless you support privatising TfL where it will inevitably go bust and cost more anyway.
But my question remains, why would Londoners blame Khan for that?
I have little or no interest in what politician gets the blame.
The question is - in the long run, who pays?
Who should pay for trains very 5 minutes on the District Line? And why?
We should all pay for transport across the country, it's a public service.
So hence I said, increase funding elsewhere, not cut that in London.
To what level? If we are all home working in the future niranva, why run empty trains?
Even if it doesn't happen there's bound to be a moment on election night when punters believe it's more likely than 66/1 which would be a good time to cash out.
Why would voters blame Khan if central govt takes responsibility for it? I just dont get it? Surely neither party should want responsibility for TfL at the moment?
The Tory approach to London seems to be that Londoners are idiots and will vote Khan out because it's his fault.
Problem is that the Tories are so unpopular in London already and they're going backwards. And Bailey is hopeless.
Even in 2019 Labour didn't really go backwards in London, there's simply no way the Tories make any progress there in 2024. I bet there are good odds on Labour/Lib Dev gains in London
If the ridership on TfL is permanently reduced by home working and people moving out of Central London in consequence, then who should pay the increase in the difference between fares and operational costs?
MY understanding is that the biggest crash in income is in annual tickets - that used to be a nice, reliable source of income for TfL.... Multi month ones as well.....
Well it's going to end up being the taxpayer unless you support privatising TfL where it will inevitably go bust and cost more anyway.
But my question remains, why would Londoners blame Khan for that?
I have little or no interest in what politician gets the blame.
The question is - in the long run, who pays?
Who should pay for trains very 5 minutes on the District Line? And why?
We should all pay for transport across the country, it's a public service.
So hence I said, increase funding elsewhere, not cut that in London.
To what level? If we are all home working in the future niranva, why run empty trains?
To the level that is required for them to not be terrible, matching France's spending would be a good start.
Why would voters blame Khan if central govt takes responsibility for it? I just dont get it? Surely neither party should want responsibility for TfL at the moment?
The Tory approach to London seems to be that Londoners are idiots and will vote Khan out because it's his fault.
Problem is that the Tories are so unpopular in London already and they're going backwards. And Bailey is hopeless.
Even in 2019 Labour didn't really go backwards in London, there's simply no way the Tories make any progress there in 2024. I bet there are good odds on Labour/Lib Dev gains in London
If the ridership on TfL is permanently reduced by home working and people moving out of Central London in consequence, then who should pay the increase in the difference between fares and operational costs?
MY understanding is that the biggest crash in income is in annual tickets - that used to be a nice, reliable source of income for TfL.... Multi month ones as well.....
Well it's going to end up being the taxpayer unless you support privatising TfL where it will inevitably go bust and cost more anyway.
But my question remains, why would Londoners blame Khan for that?
I have little or no interest in what politician gets the blame.
The question is - in the long run, who pays?
Who should pay for trains very 5 minutes on the District Line? And why?
We should all pay for transport across the country, it's a public service.
So hence I said, increase funding elsewhere, not cut that in London.
To what level? If we are all home working in the future niranva, why run empty trains?
Because if we run packed trains then the virus will spread a lot faster!
Longer term it is a valid question, but will depend on variables we dont know yet, such as how many people will continue to commute, how many tourists will visit and so on.
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris.
Sunak would also make the necessary compromises with the EU for a FTA most likely Boris would not eg on state aid
Had a high approval rating in early July. That was cut-price-Dishy Rishi, not Stingy Sunak.
Who is currently copping the blame for Manchester - Sunak's name isn't being mentioned
Good point. I wonder why not?
Say you are a beleaguered prime minister - colleagues are openly saying you should be replaced by your more competent and more popular chancellor. You have to stand up in a press conference to defend the indefensible policy that (as as we know) originated with that chancellor. Wouldn't you want to say, actually it's his policy?
Andy Burnham has been elevated to cult meme status, it's such a shame he is not an MP
I chucked a couple of quid on him as next PM at 94/1. Weirder things have happened.
The next PM is likely to be a Tory.
Probably not Sunak after he's just shafted the North.
The Harrying of the North will not be forgotten.
I could see the Tories losing much of the Red Wall under Sunak but then I could see them regaining southern seats like St Albans, Putney, Richmond Park, Enfield Southgate and Battersea and a few Midlands seats like Warwick and Leamington they won under Cameron but have now lost under his leadership to partly make up for it
The Tories re-taking seats in London...?
Under Sunak yes, he has an approval rating of 56% in London and 57% with Remain voters a big contrast with Boris
I have the greatest respect for you HYUFD but there is little chance the Tories go anywhere but backwards in London, even in 2019 under Corbyn they gained a seat there
The comparison would be election 1992, with Sunak as Major and Boris as Thatcher, No Deal his Poll Tax and Starmer as Kinnock.
Many current Tory seats in the North and Wales and Midlands were won by Kinnock in 1992 but lots of London Labour seats and a few southern Labour and LD seats like St Albans and Canterbury and Oxford West and Abingdon were won by Major in that same election
The Remainer South are not going to fall in line behind a pro-austerity Brexiteer. Remember Johnson is the natural cash spaffer, not Sunak.
If you are assuming Sunak loses the marginals in Wales, the North and the Midlands, you might be in a spot of bother.
At election 1992 the Tories still lost a net 40 seats, that would see Sunak scrape home, I am not suggesting a Sunak landslide
Netflix not looking too good, honestly I think Amazon has doomed them
A link is always helpful.
Netflix reported its third quarter earnings today, and although Netflix is acknowledging slower growth, the company is still adding subscribers. The company added 2.2 million net subscribers in Q3, compared with the company’s 2.5m guidance. The company saw $6.44 billion in revenue, beating expectations.
The worry seems to be too little new content, because of COVID. I don't think Amazon are in the same universe in terms of record in creating original content.
I would have thought Disney+ is a bigger issue for Netflix, they own a massive library of amazing content and a number of companies that consistently create new popular stuff.
What is Critical Race Theory? I'm afraid it's passed me by
If I recall correctly, under Critical Race Theory, not knowing about and believing in Critical Race Theory means you are (at least) an unconscious racist.
To anyone who is surprised by that - its straight out of the classic 20th cent Marxist-Leninist bible. Anyone not *positively* for the Party and the Program was An Enemy Of The People.
Why would voters blame Khan if central govt takes responsibility for it? I just dont get it? Surely neither party should want responsibility for TfL at the moment?
The Tory approach to London seems to be that Londoners are idiots and will vote Khan out because it's his fault.
Problem is that the Tories are so unpopular in London already and they're going backwards. And Bailey is hopeless.
Even in 2019 Labour didn't really go backwards in London, there's simply no way the Tories make any progress there in 2024. I bet there are good odds on Labour/Lib Dev gains in London
The £15 a day congestion charge is £3k per year for a car commuter. There will be plenty of those in Tory seats in London outer suburbs and even across the south east. Not too mention it is so far off the scale of laffer curve in terms of net govt tax receipts that they will need to tax everyone across the country more to get some of the lost income tax and VAT back.
Aren't the Tories proposing to extend this to the whole of London, in which case I ask again: why would Londoners blame Khan for that?
Between the North and South circular. Ludicrous, will cost tens of thousands of jobs. If they want such a scheme, something like £5 per day with an option to buy a year for £250 would be the right kind of pricing.
Funnily enough, I’d actually support it - as long as there was a proper exemption for vocational motoring like deliverymen, builders, public services etc.
The thing that snarls up the roads around here in the mornings is pointless school runs, when the children (and the parents) could walk. I’m sick of seeing overweight children being ferried 1000 yards to school.
In school holidays, the roads are clearer and buses and people who have work to do can get through.
Why would voters blame Khan if central govt takes responsibility for it? I just dont get it? Surely neither party should want responsibility for TfL at the moment?
The Tory approach to London seems to be that Londoners are idiots and will vote Khan out because it's his fault.
Problem is that the Tories are so unpopular in London already and they're going backwards. And Bailey is hopeless.
Even in 2019 Labour didn't really go backwards in London, there's simply no way the Tories make any progress there in 2024. I bet there are good odds on Labour/Lib Dev gains in London
If the ridership on TfL is permanently reduced by home working and people moving out of Central London in consequence, then who should pay the increase in the difference between fares and operational costs?
MY understanding is that the biggest crash in income is in annual tickets - that used to be a nice, reliable source of income for TfL.... Multi month ones as well.....
Well it's going to end up being the taxpayer unless you support privatising TfL where it will inevitably go bust and cost more anyway.
But my question remains, why would Londoners blame Khan for that?
I have little or no interest in what politician gets the blame.
The question is - in the long run, who pays?
Who should pay for trains very 5 minutes on the District Line? And why?
We should all pay for transport across the country, it's a public service.
So hence I said, increase funding elsewhere, not cut that in London.
To what level? If we are all home working in the future niranva, why run empty trains?
Because if we run packed trains then the virus will spread a lot faster!
Longer term it is a valid question, but will depend on variables we dont know yet, such as how many people will continue to commute, how many tourists will visit and so on.
The long run needs looking at.
If we move to a decentralised setup - which I favour - this will mean that we will need to radically reconsider what is public transport. And why.
At certain levels of decentralisation, rail makes as much sense for carrying people as carrying coal.
What is Critical Race Theory? I'm afraid it's passed me by
If I recall correctly, under Critical Race Theory, not knowing about and believing in Critical Race Theory means you are (at least) an unconscious racist.
To anyone who is surprised by that - its straight out of the classic 20th cent Marxist-Leninist bible. Anyone not *positively* for the Party and the Program was An Enemy Of The People.
Why would voters blame Khan if central govt takes responsibility for it? I just dont get it? Surely neither party should want responsibility for TfL at the moment?
The Tory approach to London seems to be that Londoners are idiots and will vote Khan out because it's his fault.
Problem is that the Tories are so unpopular in London already and they're going backwards. And Bailey is hopeless.
Even in 2019 Labour didn't really go backwards in London, there's simply no way the Tories make any progress there in 2024. I bet there are good odds on Labour/Lib Dev gains in London
The £15 a day congestion charge is £3k per year for a car commuter. There will be plenty of those in Tory seats in London outer suburbs and even across the south east. Not too mention it is so far off the scale of laffer curve in terms of net govt tax receipts that they will need to tax everyone across the country more to get some of the lost income tax and VAT back.
Aren't the Tories proposing to extend this to the whole of London, in which case I ask again: why would Londoners blame Khan for that?
Between the North and South circular. Ludicrous, will cost tens of thousands of jobs. If they want such a scheme, something like £5 per day with an option to buy a year for £250 would be the right kind of pricing.
Funnily enough, I’d actually support it - as long as there was a proper exemption for vocational motoring like deliverymen, builders, public services etc.
The thing that snarls up the roads around here in the mornings is pointless school runs, when the children (and the parents) could walk. I’m sick of seeing overweight children being ferried 1000 yards to school.
In school holidays, the roads are clearer and buses and people who have work to do can get through.
A lot of people who work in those areas wont be able to afford an extra £3k per year, a two car family it would be £6k per year. They will have to leave their jobs.
Government policy on the issue was considered throughout 1982, and the Conservative Party put a "promise to scrap the metropolitan county councils" and the GLC, in their manifesto for the 1983 general election.
Mr Gove’s claim that Brexit was like moving to a new house — initially a hassle but ultimately worth it — was received “like a bucket of cold sick”, according to one participant. Another said it was “rehashed boosterism”. Mr Johnson said he would help business get ready for the change.
I thought we held all the cards and Brexit had no downsides?
So, is the great Brexit capitulation incoming? Get your bets in now
Will we wait to see if a deal (if one is had) is a capitulation (as may well be likely) rather than assume that a deal is, in itself, evidence of capitulation?
Government policy on the issue was considered throughout 1982, and the Conservative Party put a "promise to scrap the metropolitan county councils" and the GLC, in their manifesto for the 1983 general election.
As was the Northern Powerhouse a policy of the Cameron government which mayors were a major part.
But EU officials, and senior diplomats from Europe’s biggest capitals, say they are relaxed about the U.K.’s posturing, which they say they recognize is necessary for Johnson to be able to sell a compromise to euro-skeptics at home. One official described the current standoff as theatrics. Another called Friday’s statement an expected and artificial provocation.
Why would voters blame Khan if central govt takes responsibility for it? I just dont get it? Surely neither party should want responsibility for TfL at the moment?
The Tory approach to London seems to be that Londoners are idiots and will vote Khan out because it's his fault.
Problem is that the Tories are so unpopular in London already and they're going backwards. And Bailey is hopeless.
Even in 2019 Labour didn't really go backwards in London, there's simply no way the Tories make any progress there in 2024. I bet there are good odds on Labour/Lib Dev gains in London
If the ridership on TfL is permanently reduced by home working and people moving out of Central London in consequence, then who should pay the increase in the difference between fares and operational costs?
MY understanding is that the biggest crash in income is in annual tickets - that used to be a nice, reliable source of income for TfL.... Multi month ones as well.....
Well it's going to end up being the taxpayer unless you support privatising TfL where it will inevitably go bust and cost more anyway.
But my question remains, why would Londoners blame Khan for that?
I have little or no interest in what politician gets the blame.
The question is - in the long run, who pays?
Who should pay for trains very 5 minutes on the District Line? And why?
We should all pay for transport across the country, it's a public service.
So hence I said, increase funding elsewhere, not cut that in London.
To what level? If we are all home working in the future niranva, why run empty trains?
Because if we run packed trains then the virus will spread a lot faster!
Longer term it is a valid question, but will depend on variables we dont know yet, such as how many people will continue to commute, how many tourists will visit and so on.
The long run needs looking at.
If we move to a decentralised setup - which I favour - this will mean that we will need to radically reconsider what is public transport. And why.
At certain levels of decentralisation, rail makes as much sense for carrying people as carrying coal.
Why look at the long term now when we have little idea what it will look like, and two massively complicated current messes to get through in covid and brexit? Focus on the next 6 months is, very unusually, fine.
Government policy on the issue was considered throughout 1982, and the Conservative Party put a "promise to scrap the metropolitan county councils" and the GLC, in their manifesto for the 1983 general election.
As was the Northern Powerhouse a policy of the Cameron government which mayors were a major part.
And when asked, the people of Manchester said "no thanks", and yet Cameron and Osborne did it anyway.
Why would voters blame Khan if central govt takes responsibility for it? I just dont get it? Surely neither party should want responsibility for TfL at the moment?
The Tory approach to London seems to be that Londoners are idiots and will vote Khan out because it's his fault.
Problem is that the Tories are so unpopular in London already and they're going backwards. And Bailey is hopeless.
Even in 2019 Labour didn't really go backwards in London, there's simply no way the Tories make any progress there in 2024. I bet there are good odds on Labour/Lib Dev gains in London
If the ridership on TfL is permanently reduced by home working and people moving out of Central London in consequence, then who should pay the increase in the difference between fares and operational costs?
MY understanding is that the biggest crash in income is in annual tickets - that used to be a nice, reliable source of income for TfL.... Multi month ones as well.....
Well it's going to end up being the taxpayer unless you support privatising TfL where it will inevitably go bust and cost more anyway.
But my question remains, why would Londoners blame Khan for that?
I have little or no interest in what politician gets the blame.
The question is - in the long run, who pays?
Who should pay for trains very 5 minutes on the District Line? And why?
We should all pay for transport across the country, it's a public service.
So hence I said, increase funding elsewhere, not cut that in London.
To what level? If we are all home working in the future niranva, why run empty trains?
Because if we run packed trains then the virus will spread a lot faster!
Longer term it is a valid question, but will depend on variables we dont know yet, such as how many people will continue to commute, how many tourists will visit and so on.
The long run needs looking at.
If we move to a decentralised setup - which I favour - this will mean that we will need to radically reconsider what is public transport. And why.
At certain levels of decentralisation, rail makes as much sense for carrying people as carrying coal.
Rail is by far most profitable carrying non-time sensitive bulk goods exactly like coal. But generally over longer distances than you typically find in the UK!
If anyone thinks that taking powers away from mayors back to London, rather than providing more and more devolved powers then they really are living in a very delusional world, no doubt down south where the power being seating in London suits them very well whilst keeping the north pushed down.
If anyone thinks that taking powers away from mayors back to London, rather than providing more and more devolved powers then they really are living in a very delusional world, no doubt down south where the power being seating in London suits them very well whilst keeping the north pushed down.
"The more you tighten your grip, the more Northern Cities will slip through your fingers"
Lisa Nandy would look swish in a headphone buns tbh.
So, is the great Brexit capitulation incoming? Get your bets in now
Will we wait to see if a deal (if one is had) is a capitulation (as may well be likely) rather than assume that a deal is, in itself, evidence of capitulation?
They really ought to have had a referendum on whether the people of Greater Manchester even wanted a directly elected mayor.
Do we have referendums on whether we want parochial local councillors? Most places have such people forced upon them.
Strategic city regional mayors are one of the best ideas of the Cameron government.
I don't actually agree about them being a good idea, not in the slipshod way the whole regional 'devolution' has gone about, but I do agree with a basic point that there's nothing wrong
People don't even always know what they might want, and will later vigorously defend the retention of something they even fought to prevent, and so while I wouldn't suggest local views are entirely irrelevant in such a situation, I don't know that administrative reform of local governance is necessarily something people are in a position to provide that useful a view on.
Though in point of fact people will often angrily claim that there should be referendums on matters relating to parish level governance, if you suggest a change.
Government policy on the issue was considered throughout 1982, and the Conservative Party put a "promise to scrap the metropolitan county councils" and the GLC, in their manifesto for the 1983 general election.
As was the Northern Powerhouse a policy of the Cameron government which mayors were a major part.
And when asked, the people of Manchester said "no thanks", and yet Cameron and Osborne did it anyway.
You do understand that the Manchester mayor was for a small part of the city with no power and the metro mayor covers the city region with real powers and as such the referendum gives you no insight as to what people wanted?
People want real powers devolved locally, not some bull shit mayor with no powers covering a tiny section of the city.
Comments
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss5l05t93j8&
The teachers.
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/status/1318646614752374785?s=20
TfL today is quite good - there's some hint of a clean, efficient, and good service. The staff rightly have some degree of pride in it. There's more that could be done though and they're sitting on the transport equivalent of a gold-mine. Good management could potentially make TfL profitable in my view given the simply wonderful (and to TfL free) locations and routes in the network.
I don't think for one moment that Khan is the key factor at work here, and if you'll forgive me CHB I see him as worse than Boris, but having a London Mayor, and the most obvious result of that being transport is.
Judges
Bishops
Lords
Experts
Good post.
Negotiating with all also restricts you somewhat to doing it by area - county or mayoralty. Glossopdale in High Peak has a case rate near 400, feeds almost entirely into GM's hospitals and yet is not tier 3'd because they're not on Burnham's patch.
Ironic to urge government to get a grip on a thread about their autocratic tendencies.
The question is - in the long run, who pays?
Who should pay for trains very 5 minutes on the District Line*? And why?
*It's great for me - I live very close, but not too close, to a station on the District line. Zone 2 and all.....
If you are assuming Sunak loses the marginals in Wales, the North and the Midlands, you might be in a spot of bother.
So hence I said, increase funding elsewhere, not cut that in London.
I genuinely wonder if 2024 will be 2010 repeat but with Labour the largest party.
https://twitter.com/calvinrobinson/status/1318624835937931265?s=20
https://andrewsullivan.substack.com/p/the-roots-of-wokeness
Longer term it is a valid question, but will depend on variables we dont know yet, such as how many people will continue to commute, how many tourists will visit and so on.
https://www.axios.com/huawei-zte-ban-5g-sweden-219b66bc-63e7-428d-bbd1-daa87bca5172.html
Just like those muppets on Twitter that keep demanding Khan be removed because he's Labour and a Muslim
https://twitter.com/JasonGroves1/status/1318650844217266180?s=20
Say you are a beleaguered prime minister - colleagues are openly saying you should be replaced by your more competent and more popular chancellor. You have to stand up in a press conference to defend the indefensible policy that (as as we know) originated with that chancellor. Wouldn't you want to say, actually it's his policy?
Netflix reported its third quarter earnings today, and although Netflix is acknowledging slower growth, the company is still adding subscribers. The company added 2.2 million net subscribers in Q3, compared with the company’s 2.5m guidance. The company saw $6.44 billion in revenue, beating expectations.
https://www.theverge.com/2020/10/20/21525428/netflix-earnings-q3-content-subscribers-pandemic-competition
The worry seems to be too little new content, because of COVID. I don't think Amazon are in the same universe in terms of record in creating original content.
I would have thought Disney+ is a bigger issue for Netflix, they own a massive library of amazing content and a number of companies that consistently create new popular stuff.
To anyone who is surprised by that - its straight out of the classic 20th cent Marxist-Leninist bible. Anyone not *positively* for the Party and the Program was An Enemy Of The People.
The thing that snarls up the roads around here in the mornings is pointless school runs, when the children (and the parents) could walk. I’m sick of seeing overweight children being ferried 1000 yards to school.
In school holidays, the roads are clearer and buses and people who have work to do can get through.
https://twitter.com/GeorgeWParker/status/1318645779360288773?s=20
If we move to a decentralised setup - which I favour - this will mean that we will need to radically reconsider what is public transport. And why.
At certain levels of decentralisation, rail makes as much sense for carrying people as carrying coal.
Government policy on the issue was considered throughout 1982, and the Conservative Party put a "promise to scrap the metropolitan county councils" and the GLC, in their manifesto for the 1983 general election.
Strategic city regional mayors are one of the best ideas of the Cameron government.
I thought we held all the cards and Brexit had no downsides?
The point is, the people of Manchester were asked, they said no, and the Tories imposed a mayor on them anyway.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-10-20/the-eu-has-a-plan-to-get-a-brexit-deal-let-johnson-claim-he-won
Lisa Nandy would look swish in a headphone buns tbh.
People don't even always know what they might want, and will later vigorously defend the retention of something they even fought to prevent, and so while I wouldn't suggest local views are entirely irrelevant in such a situation, I don't know that administrative reform of local governance is necessarily something people are in a position to provide that useful a view on.
Though in point of fact people will often angrily claim that there should be referendums on matters relating to parish level governance, if you suggest a change.
People want real powers devolved locally, not some bull shit mayor with no powers covering a tiny section of the city.