Seems like a small swing to Labour, MoE though so in reality both parties remain tied?
From Greens and LDs - Tory vote is stable. Quite remarkable in the sense that for the umpteenth time it shows how out of touch are both the media and indeed many PB commenters. The dissonance they must feel may be what contributes to some of their outlandish commentary we see on here and elsewhere.
The person who lives in Spain lectures people in the UK about being “out of touch”. Right.
There’s nothing “out of touch” about not agreeing with Conservatives when only 40% of the population even supports them.
Lol - it's very instructive to view the UK from a distance. Gives another perspective. I'm sorry that the polling upsets you but if you are satisfied with Labour's polling in the midst of both the pandemic and the Brexit shambles more power to your elbow though - could keep Labour out of power for another 20 years with luck.
So are you saying Labour should be polling higher? Maybe three points higher but then any higher and they're beating Blair.
Now I am wanting Labour to win a super majority as much as the next guy but I think that's extremely likely. Labour's polling is probably as good as it could be, no?
That voter-magnet supreme, Ed Miliband, was 20 points ahead at one point.
Seems like a small swing to Labour, MoE though so in reality both parties remain tied?
From Greens and LDs - Tory vote is stable. Quite remarkable in the sense that for the umpteenth time it shows how out of touch are both the media and indeed many PB commenters. The dissonance they must feel may be what contributes to some of their outlandish commentary we see on here and elsewhere.
The person who lives in Spain lectures people in the UK about being “out of touch”. Right.
There’s nothing “out of touch” about not agreeing with Conservatives when only 40% of the population even supports them.
Lol - it's very instructive to view the UK from a distance. Gives another perspective. I'm sorry that the polling upsets you but if you are satisfied with Labour's polling in the midst of both the pandemic and the Brexit shambles more power to your elbow though - could keep Labour out of power for another 20 years with luck.
So are you saying Labour should be polling higher? Maybe three points higher but then any higher and they're beating Blair.
Now I am wanting Labour to win a super majority as much as the next guy but I think that's extremely likely. Labour's polling is probably as good as it could be, no?
That voter-magnet supreme, Ed Miliband, was 20 points ahead at one point.
Scotland is an opportunity for Labour to make a bit of a comeback, they can surely beat the Tories for second.
Doubt it now Mr Starmer has come out all over HYUFD. That will piss off a fair proportion of his existing supporters, will it not? Labour is IIRC more split on Yes/No to Indy than any other mainstream party, even the littluns like the LDs.
I think it's worth bearing in mind that, despite everything, many Scots voters still harbour a fairly positive attitude to Labour. Although I don't expect that to manifest itself in too many votes next May, that latent sense could make an appearance at some point. And why not in 2024? Let's just suppose, that most Scottish voters don't have a long-lasting paroxysm of rage when Boris says no to IndyRef next year, and the Sturgeon administration lumbers along for another 4 years getting a few more scratches on the paintwork. By the time we get to a competitive GE in 2024 who knows what could happen? Maybe some of those formerly Lab supporters may give Labour another go, esp if a dose of federalism peels off some of the soft-Indy voters. By no means impossible.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Seems like a small swing to Labour, MoE though so in reality both parties remain tied?
From Greens and LDs - Tory vote is stable. Quite remarkable in the sense that for the umpteenth time it shows how out of touch are both the media and indeed many PB commenters. The dissonance they must feel may be what contributes to some of their outlandish commentary we see on here and elsewhere.
The person who lives in Spain lectures people in the UK about being “out of touch”. Right.
There’s nothing “out of touch” about not agreeing with Conservatives when only 40% of the population even supports them.
Lol - it's very instructive to view the UK from a distance. Gives another perspective. I'm sorry that the polling upsets you but if you are satisfied with Labour's polling in the midst of both the pandemic and the Brexit shambles more power to your elbow though - could keep Labour out of power for another 20 years with luck.
So are you saying Labour should be polling higher? Maybe three points higher but then any higher and they're beating Blair.
Now I am wanting Labour to win a super majority as much as the next guy but I think that's extremely likely. Labour's polling is probably as good as it could be, no?
Ed Miliband was 10 points ahead of the Coalition by 2012. And he went on to lose.
For Labour to really look like winning, my guess is that they need to be recording 10+ point leads over the next year.
Seems like a small swing to Labour, MoE though so in reality both parties remain tied?
From Greens and LDs - Tory vote is stable. Quite remarkable in the sense that for the umpteenth time it shows how out of touch are both the media and indeed many PB commenters. The dissonance they must feel may be what contributes to some of their outlandish commentary we see on here and elsewhere.
The person who lives in Spain lectures people in the UK about being “out of touch”. Right.
There’s nothing “out of touch” about not agreeing with Conservatives when only 40% of the population even supports them.
Lol - it's very instructive to view the UK from a distance. Gives another perspective. I'm sorry that the polling upsets you but if you are satisfied with Labour's polling in the midst of both the pandemic and the Brexit shambles more power to your elbow though - could keep Labour out of power for another 20 years with luck.
So are you saying Labour should be polling higher? Maybe three points higher but then any higher and they're beating Blair.
Now I am wanting Labour to win a super majority as much as the next guy but I think that's extremely likely. Labour's polling is probably as good as it could be, no?
That voter-magnet supreme, Ed Miliband, was 20 points ahead at one point.
And still lost.
The most he was ahead in any one poll was 16 points, with most polls 12 to 14%.
Seems like a small swing to Labour, MoE though so in reality both parties remain tied?
From Greens and LDs - Tory vote is stable. Quite remarkable in the sense that for the umpteenth time it shows how out of touch are both the media and indeed many PB commenters. The dissonance they must feel may be what contributes to some of their outlandish commentary we see on here and elsewhere.
The person who lives in Spain lectures people in the UK about being “out of touch”. Right.
There’s nothing “out of touch” about not agreeing with Conservatives when only 40% of the population even supports them.
Lol - it's very instructive to view the UK from a distance. Gives another perspective. I'm sorry that the polling upsets you but if you are satisfied with Labour's polling in the midst of both the pandemic and the Brexit shambles more power to your elbow though - could keep Labour out of power for another 20 years with luck.
So are you saying Labour should be polling higher? Maybe three points higher but then any higher and they're beating Blair.
Now I am wanting Labour to win a super majority as much as the next guy but I think that's extremely likely. Labour's polling is probably as good as it could be, no?
Ed Miliband was 10 points ahead of the Coalition by 2012. And he went on to lose.
For Labour to really look like winning, my guess is that they need to be recording 10+ point leads over the next year.
By the middle of next week, however, the bandwagon will pull up outside 10 Downing Street and a familiar blonde figure will clamber aboard. By New Year’s Day we will all be in lockdown mark 4 – with the schools closed for the duration of January.
That's very interestng and sounds about right. Labour's dilemma then is how to attract the racist homophobic vote without actively supporting racism and homophobia. Michelle Obama answers that well in her book. You don't. You just hope that education and example will move the next generation to see the world more generously.
Kind of how I see it too. Bit more than just hope though. You stay out of bleeding edge social issues - where you're too far ahead of the curve - and you make a big appeal to the economic self interest of those "socially conservative" (to use the PC phrase) working class voters who have gone blue. This is what I'm hoping to see from Starmer. He isn't Corbyn - who genuinely had a "patriotism" problem due to being steeped in anti-West protest politics - and just that fact goes most of the way he needs to on this. He does NOT need to start wearing cross of St George underpants outside his trousers. Or indeed inside them. The advice that he do so from well meaning Conservative posters (and I do accept the sincerity in Casino's case, albeit less so in others) should be politely declined.
To be fair, Ed M held the Red Wall. I think this idea that Starmer can't win it back is probably incorrect, I guess in time we will see how much was Corbyn + Brexit, I am going to guess it was a lot of it.
That was before 23 June 2016. Brexit has (sadly) changed the political landscape. I'm not writing off the Red Wall either - you can't do that - but what I'm saying is if winning it back requires the adoption of conservative social values in place of progressive ones, I don't want to go that route, and I also think it would be electorally very risky, given Labour's voting base these days is not that way inclined.
Okay but then how do you pick up seats to replace the Red Wall? There aren't enough of them. A clean sweep of London (which is basically impossible but Labour will pick up more seats there) doesn't get you close.
Labour needs to re-build its coalition. I am sorry to say this but frankly the socially liberal Corbyn base makes sod all difference to electability.
You see that in 2019, where despite more votes and a higher percentage than Brown in 2010, Labour did a lot worse. If all we do is stack up votes in already held seats, it's a waste of time.
The route to a Government is through the Red Wall, always has been. We need to do a Biden.
Now regarding Scotland, what is toxic in the rest of England is the idea the SNP will be in Government. We need to make it clear they won't be in Government with Labour, even if that means Labour goes backwards in Scotland. Perception matters. In some sense we need to attack the SNP more than the Tories.
Some very good points. It is difficult. Glad it's Starmer not me with the task.
Do a Biden? Not so easy since there isn't a Trump. But I do totally get the importance of the Red Wall. My view is we should try and win it back with economic policies that clearly benefit those voters in those places.
Scotland is such a toughie for Labour. Although I personally think Sindy is coming so longer term it won't be. For 2024, no coalitions, but I don't think it's wise to rule out any arrangement with the SNP since it might be the only route to government.
You talk about the "Corbynite" base, btw, but I don't think it is Corbynite. I'm talking about the millions of 45 and under socially liberal metropolitans who vote Labour. They don't need a Corbyn to do that. Starmer is fine. But he'd be less fine if he morphs into Frank Field.
Seems like a small swing to Labour, MoE though so in reality both parties remain tied?
From Greens and LDs - Tory vote is stable. Quite remarkable in the sense that for the umpteenth time it shows how out of touch are both the media and indeed many PB commenters. The dissonance they must feel may be what contributes to some of their outlandish commentary we see on here and elsewhere.
The person who lives in Spain lectures people in the UK about being “out of touch”. Right.
There’s nothing “out of touch” about not agreeing with Conservatives when only 40% of the population even supports them.
Lol - it's very instructive to view the UK from a distance. Gives another perspective. I'm sorry that the polling upsets you but if you are satisfied with Labour's polling in the midst of both the pandemic and the Brexit shambles more power to your elbow though - could keep Labour out of power for another 20 years with luck.
So are you saying Labour should be polling higher? Maybe three points higher but then any higher and they're beating Blair.
Now I am wanting Labour to win a super majority as much as the next guy but I think that's extremely likely. Labour's polling is probably as good as it could be, no?
In all honesty polling mid-term rarely means a great deal anyway but I certainly remember times in the late 70s-90s when oppositions routinely polled mcuh higher and governments much lower than we are seeing today. Brexit seems to have been the focus for a massive hardening of attitudes on both sides which has left the 40/40 split you refer to. Under those circumstances Labour has a big problem as its vote is quite heavily concentrated in groups and areas which limit the number of seats it can win. All those 30k + majorities in the urban centres and among some ethnic groups means a very high number of wasted votes.
Seems like a small swing to Labour, MoE though so in reality both parties remain tied?
From Greens and LDs - Tory vote is stable. Quite remarkable in the sense that for the umpteenth time it shows how out of touch are both the media and indeed many PB commenters. The dissonance they must feel may be what contributes to some of their outlandish commentary we see on here and elsewhere.
The person who lives in Spain lectures people in the UK about being “out of touch”. Right.
There’s nothing “out of touch” about not agreeing with Conservatives when only 40% of the population even supports them.
Lol - it's very instructive to view the UK from a distance. Gives another perspective. I'm sorry that the polling upsets you but if you are satisfied with Labour's polling in the midst of both the pandemic and the Brexit shambles more power to your elbow though - could keep Labour out of power for another 20 years with luck.
So are you saying Labour should be polling higher? Maybe three points higher but then any higher and they're beating Blair.
Now I am wanting Labour to win a super majority as much as the next guy but I think that's extremely likely. Labour's polling is probably as good as it could be, no?
Ed Miliband was 10 points ahead of the Coalition by 2012. And he went on to lose.
For Labour to really look like winning, my guess is that they need to be recording 10+ point leads over the next year.
That's very interestng and sounds about right. Labour's dilemma then is how to attract the racist homophobic vote without actively supporting racism and homophobia. Michelle Obama answers that well in her book. You don't. You just hope that education and example will move the next generation to see the world more generously.
Kind of how I see it too. Bit more than just hope though. You stay out of bleeding edge social issues - where you're too far ahead of the curve - and you make a big appeal to the economic self interest of those "socially conservative" (to use the PC phrase) working class voters who have gone blue. This is what I'm hoping to see from Starmer. He isn't Corbyn - who genuinely had a "patriotism" problem due to being steeped in anti-West protest politics - and just that fact goes most of the way he needs to on this. He does NOT need to start wearing cross of St George underpants outside his trousers. Or indeed inside them. The advice that he do so from well meaning Conservative posters (and I do accept the sincerity in Casino's case, albeit less so in others) should be politely declined.
To be fair, Ed M held the Red Wall. I think this idea that Starmer can't win it back is probably incorrect, I guess in time we will see how much was Corbyn + Brexit, I am going to guess it was a lot of it.
That was before 23 June 2016. Brexit has (sadly) changed the political landscape. I'm not writing off the Red Wall either - you can't do that - but what I'm saying is if winning it back requires the adoption of conservative social values in place of progressive ones, I don't want to go that route, and I also think it would be electorally very risky, given Labour's voting base these days is not that way inclined.
Okay but then how do you pick up seats to replace the Red Wall? There aren't enough of them. A clean sweep of London (which is basically impossible but Labour will pick up more seats there) doesn't get you close.
Labour needs to re-build its coalition. I am sorry to say this but frankly the socially liberal Corbyn base makes sod all difference to electability.
You see that in 2019, where despite more votes and a higher percentage than Brown in 2010, Labour did a lot worse. If all we do is stack up votes in already held seats, it's a waste of time.
The route to a Government is through the Red Wall, always has been. We need to do a Biden.
Now regarding Scotland, what is toxic in the rest of England is the idea the SNP will be in Government. We need to make it clear they won't be in Government with Labour, even if that means Labour goes backwards in Scotland. Perception matters. In some sense we need to attack the SNP more than the Tories.
Some very good points. It is difficult. Glad it's Starmer not me with the task.
Do a Biden? Not so easy since there isn't a Trump. But I do totally get the importance of the Red Wall. My view is we should try and win it back with economic policies that clearly benefit those voters in those places.
Scotland is such a toughie for Labour. Although I personally think Sindy is coming so longer term it won't be. For 2024, no coalitions, but I don't think it's wise to rule out any arrangement with the SNP since it might be the only route to government.
You talk about the "Corbynite" base, btw, but I don't think it is Corbynite. I'm talking about the millions of 45 and under socially liberal metropolitans who vote Labour. They don't need a Corbyn to do that. Starmer is fine. But he'd be less fine if he morphs into Frank Field.
There isn't a Trump? Where have you been for the last year?
Seems like a small swing to Labour, MoE though so in reality both parties remain tied?
From Greens and LDs - Tory vote is stable. Quite remarkable in the sense that for the umpteenth time it shows how out of touch are both the media and indeed many PB commenters. The dissonance they must feel may be what contributes to some of their outlandish commentary we see on here and elsewhere.
The person who lives in Spain lectures people in the UK about being “out of touch”. Right.
There’s nothing “out of touch” about not agreeing with Conservatives when only 40% of the population even supports them.
Lol - it's very instructive to view the UK from a distance. Gives another perspective. I'm sorry that the polling upsets you but if you are satisfied with Labour's polling in the midst of both the pandemic and the Brexit shambles more power to your elbow though - could keep Labour out of power for another 20 years with luck.
So are you saying Labour should be polling higher? Maybe three points higher but then any higher and they're beating Blair.
Now I am wanting Labour to win a super majority as much as the next guy but I think that's extremely likely. Labour's polling is probably as good as it could be, no?
It isn't so much how much higher Labour gan go, but how far the Conservatives can plummet.
This is where - if any - a sustained lead comes from, IMHO.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
I would have thought that by now no-one would be surprised that people are having to step up personally to fix issues that the Government should be resolving.
The fundamental point about these figures (and others that have shown the same, for years), is that Labour wins among people of working age, and loses, big time, when they retire (though obviously many do continue to work after 65). The act of retiring does seem to produce a change in values - and that applies to many of my generation who grew up as thoroughly left-wing. I don't fully understand it - I get that things like child benefit and employment rights cease to feel personally important if you're 70, but that can't be the whole story. Nor do people of my age generally become socially illiberal - all my contemporaries that I know are fine with gay marriage, women priests, etc. But they start to become...uneasy about change.
Yes. All macro "divides" are suspect but the age one does seem to be the starkest for Labour. Got to horse whisper to those oldies!
Was that a dig at me!
- Course not. It was advice to Keir. We need grey appeal.
Seems like a small swing to Labour, MoE though so in reality both parties remain tied?
From Greens and LDs - Tory vote is stable. Quite remarkable in the sense that for the umpteenth time it shows how out of touch are both the media and indeed many PB commenters. The dissonance they must feel may be what contributes to some of their outlandish commentary we see on here and elsewhere.
The person who lives in Spain lectures people in the UK about being “out of touch”. Right.
There’s nothing “out of touch” about not agreeing with Conservatives when only 40% of the population even supports them.
Lol - it's very instructive to view the UK from a distance. Gives another perspective. I'm sorry that the polling upsets you but if you are satisfied with Labour's polling in the midst of both the pandemic and the Brexit shambles more power to your elbow though - could keep Labour out of power for another 20 years with luck.
So are you saying Labour should be polling higher? Maybe three points higher but then any higher and they're beating Blair.
Now I am wanting Labour to win a super majority as much as the next guy but I think that's extremely likely. Labour's polling is probably as good as it could be, no?
Ed Miliband was 10 points ahead of the Coalition by 2012. And he went on to lose.
For Labour to really look like winning, my guess is that they need to be recording 10+ point leads over the next year.
But there are still concerns for Labour. While Miliband's approval ratings are up, he still lags stubbornly behind Cameron on the "future prime minister" question. And it's worth noting that these polls can't be the most representative we've had in recent weeks because they include the bank holiday weekend.
But perhaps I am wrong, I go with my tail between my legs
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Why is it shameful? As we keep pointing out the Tories couldn't give a fuck about anyone who isn't them.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
That's very interestng and sounds about right. Labour's dilemma then is how to attract the racist homophobic vote without actively supporting racism and homophobia. Michelle Obama answers that well in her book. You don't. You just hope that education and example will move the next generation to see the world more generously.
Kind of how I see it too. Bit more than just hope though. You stay out of bleeding edge social issues - where you're too far ahead of the curve - and you make a big appeal to the economic self interest of those "socially conservative" (to use the PC phrase) working class voters who have gone blue. This is what I'm hoping to see from Starmer. He isn't Corbyn - who genuinely had a "patriotism" problem due to being steeped in anti-West protest politics - and just that fact goes most of the way he needs to on this. He does NOT need to start wearing cross of St George underpants outside his trousers. Or indeed inside them. The advice that he do so from well meaning Conservative posters (and I do accept the sincerity in Casino's case, albeit less so in others) should be politely declined.
To be fair, Ed M held the Red Wall. I think this idea that Starmer can't win it back is probably incorrect, I guess in time we will see how much was Corbyn + Brexit, I am going to guess it was a lot of it.
That was before 23 June 2016. Brexit has (sadly) changed the political landscape. I'm not writing off the Red Wall either - you can't do that - but what I'm saying is if winning it back requires the adoption of conservative social values in place of progressive ones, I don't want to go that route, and I also think it would be electorally very risky, given Labour's voting base these days is not that way inclined.
What counts as conservative social values or country-loving, though? The Britain of the 1950's? The 1980's? The 2000's? Now?
Well that's the uni vote maintained, sadly they don't vote and/or vote in the wrong places
A friend who is a keen follower of the virus just contacted me and said she was watching the select committee on Covid and the Tory members for the most part were well informed (particularly Greg Clark) but the Labour ones were hopeless. She specifically named Dawn Butler.
The lack of talent in the parliamentary party could well be Starmer's achilles heel.
Well that's the uni vote maintained, sadly they don't vote and/or vote in the wrong places
A friend who is a keen follower of the virus just contacted me and said she was watching the select committee on Covid and the Tory members for the most part were well informed (particularly Greg Clark) but the Labour ones were hopeless. She specifically named Dawn Butler.
The lack of talent in the parliamentary party could well be Starmer's achilles heel.
There are utter idiots on both sides. Dawn Butler is one of them.
As for the crux of Casino_Royale's point, I've often spoken about that myself. I don't agree that the solution is to out social conservative Labour (which Labour can't ever do anyway), the solution is to not get involved in culture wars.
Blair was very good on this topic.
I am not calling for Labour to “out socially conservative” the Tories. Just to attack them on issues which are currently seen as “right”.
Remember tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime?
That, for starters.
Yes that was good. However new Labour in government had some bad habits . Such as announcing half baked plans every week, like the police marching people down to cash points for instant justice on minor breaches of the law. I am sure SkS is more considered in his views.
Yeh, well that’s why I vote LD. However, I want to see this government defeated and it is essential that Labour is seen as electable again.
It's an interesting discussion and I'm not blind to the points that you, Sean Fear, Casino and others are making. I won a seat that had had a Tory majority of 17,000 (29%) just 10 years earlier and held it for 13 years by paying unrelenting attention to constituents as people, never giving up on a single one of them and always trying to understand where they were coming from and looking for common ground. I've never deliberately and seriously insulted anyone in my life - not fascists, not anti-vaxxers, not climate change deniers. We all get our ideas from somewhere and it doesn't make us monsters.
I have two reservations, though:
1. One has to consider where one draws the line without abandoning the reason why one took up politics. I'm ready to listen sympathetically to people who dislike the speed of change and are afraid of it, including change caused by large-scale immigration. But if someone says to me that "Immigrants are dirty" or something like that (as I've occasionally experienced), I won't pretend to agree. I'll politely say that I think that's too generalised, and people in every group vary in how they look after themselves. If that puts the voter off, it can't be helped. Writ large, the party needs to show understanding and sympathy and address practical fears without mock-pandering.
2. How far are people actually winnable? I get that you'd like Labour to be electable. I get that Casino is sincere in wanting an opposition that he respects. But would either of you actually vote Labour? The risk that Starmer takes if he focuses on patriotism and traditional values is being generally accepted as a perfectly decent opposition leader, without actually winning, because people who put those valuues first feel (even) more at home with the Conservatives. They're pleased if other parties are a bit similar, without wanting to vote for them.
I think Starmer is absolutely right to work hard to reassure people about patriotism and respect. But when that's been reasonably broadly accepted, he needs to use that as a basis to move on to wider practical issues that change people's lives. Many people are willing to accept quite a left-wing programme if they feel OK about the general values.
It’s that late 5% Labour needs.
They don’t need to ignore or pander to racism to win them, they need to appeal to the values and issues important to this group (who tend to be white working class).
Would I vote Labour? Under the right circumstances, yes. It was not possible under Corbyn, and frankly under Miliband either. Starmer is more palatable than both of them.
Why not under Miliband?
Too wonky, lacked gravitas (at the time), made some stupid policy calls, too “beta”, stabbed his brother in the back etc.
Ok thanks. Certainly had image problems. He was too timid on policy imo. Don't know if you meant that but I agree if so.
It's a simplistic concept, might have some truth to it.
The biggest reason for me is you look at Labour and they have no depth, no ministers close to the calibre of the Blair ministry. The Tories are a mixed bag, they have a full range from excellent (Sunak) to awful (Williamson). Even in the darkest hour there's nothing and no one to suggest Labour will make a better first of things, and the worst part for them is I think a lot of the shadow cabinet are aware of this. At least with Corbyn's team there was a false sense of confidence and a belief in their own abilities. With Dodds, Thomas Symonds and many others I think they know they're nowhere near ready to take on the responsibility of government.
That's very interestng and sounds about right. Labour's dilemma then is how to attract the racist homophobic vote without actively supporting racism and homophobia. Michelle Obama answers that well in her book. You don't. You just hope that education and example will move the next generation to see the world more generously.
Kind of how I see it too. Bit more than just hope though. You stay out of bleeding edge social issues - where you're too far ahead of the curve - and you make a big appeal to the economic self interest of those "socially conservative" (to use the PC phrase) working class voters who have gone blue. This is what I'm hoping to see from Starmer. He isn't Corbyn - who genuinely had a "patriotism" problem due to being steeped in anti-West protest politics - and just that fact goes most of the way he needs to on this. He does NOT need to start wearing cross of St George underpants outside his trousers. Or indeed inside them. The advice that he do so from well meaning Conservative posters (and I do accept the sincerity in Casino's case, albeit less so in others) should be politely declined.
To be fair, Ed M held the Red Wall. I think this idea that Starmer can't win it back is probably incorrect, I guess in time we will see how much was Corbyn + Brexit, I am going to guess it was a lot of it.
That was before 23 June 2016. Brexit has (sadly) changed the political landscape. I'm not writing off the Red Wall either - you can't do that - but what I'm saying is if winning it back requires the adoption of conservative social values in place of progressive ones, I don't want to go that route, and I also think it would be electorally very risky, given Labour's voting base these days is not that way inclined.
Okay but then how do you pick up seats to replace the Red Wall? There aren't enough of them. A clean sweep of London (which is basically impossible but Labour will pick up more seats there) doesn't get you close.
Labour needs to re-build its coalition. I am sorry to say this but frankly the socially liberal Corbyn base makes sod all difference to electability.
You see that in 2019, where despite more votes and a higher percentage than Brown in 2010, Labour did a lot worse. If all we do is stack up votes in already held seats, it's a waste of time.
The route to a Government is through the Red Wall, always has been. We need to do a Biden.
Now regarding Scotland, what is toxic in the rest of England is the idea the SNP will be in Government. We need to make it clear they won't be in Government with Labour, even if that means Labour goes backwards in Scotland. Perception matters. In some sense we need to attack the SNP more than the Tories.
Some very good points. It is difficult. Glad it's Starmer not me with the task.
Do a Biden? Not so easy since there isn't a Trump. But I do totally get the importance of the Red Wall. My view is we should try and win it back with economic policies that clearly benefit those voters in those places.
Scotland is such a toughie for Labour. Although I personally think Sindy is coming so longer term it won't be. For 2024, no coalitions, but I don't think it's wise to rule out any arrangement with the SNP since it might be the only route to government.
You talk about the "Corbynite" base, btw, but I don't think it is Corbynite. I'm talking about the millions of 45 and under socially liberal metropolitans who vote Labour. They don't need a Corbyn to do that. Starmer is fine. But he'd be less fine if he morphs into Frank Field.
There isn't a Trump? Where have you been for the last year?
Ok, so there is - but just not in the same league.
That's very interestng and sounds about right. Labour's dilemma then is how to attract the racist homophobic vote without actively supporting racism and homophobia. Michelle Obama answers that well in her book. You don't. You just hope that education and example will move the next generation to see the world more generously.
Kind of how I see it too. Bit more than just hope though. You stay out of bleeding edge social issues - where you're too far ahead of the curve - and you make a big appeal to the economic self interest of those "socially conservative" (to use the PC phrase) working class voters who have gone blue. This is what I'm hoping to see from Starmer. He isn't Corbyn - who genuinely had a "patriotism" problem due to being steeped in anti-West protest politics - and just that fact goes most of the way he needs to on this. He does NOT need to start wearing cross of St George underpants outside his trousers. Or indeed inside them. The advice that he do so from well meaning Conservative posters (and I do accept the sincerity in Casino's case, albeit less so in others) should be politely declined.
To be fair, Ed M held the Red Wall. I think this idea that Starmer can't win it back is probably incorrect, I guess in time we will see how much was Corbyn + Brexit, I am going to guess it was a lot of it.
That was before 23 June 2016. Brexit has (sadly) changed the political landscape. I'm not writing off the Red Wall either - you can't do that - but what I'm saying is if winning it back requires the adoption of conservative social values in place of progressive ones, I don't want to go that route, and I also think it would be electorally very risky, given Labour's voting base these days is not that way inclined.
What counts as conservative social values or country-loving, though? The Britain of the 1950's? The 1980's? The 2000's? Now?
As for the crux of Casino_Royale's point, I've often spoken about that myself. I don't agree that the solution is to out social conservative Labour (which Labour can't ever do anyway), the solution is to not get involved in culture wars.
Blair was very good on this topic.
I am not calling for Labour to “out socially conservative” the Tories. Just to attack them on issues which are currently seen as “right”.
Remember tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime?
That, for starters.
Yes that was good. However new Labour in government had some bad habits . Such as announcing half baked plans every week, like the police marching people down to cash points for instant justice on minor breaches of the law. I am sure SkS is more considered in his views.
Yeh, well that’s why I vote LD. However, I want to see this government defeated and it is essential that Labour is seen as electable again.
It's an interesting discussion and I'm not blind to the points that you, Sean Fear, Casino and others are making. I won a seat that had had a Tory majority of 17,000 (29%) just 10 years earlier and held it for 13 years by paying unrelenting attention to constituents as people, never giving up on a single one of them and always trying to understand where they were coming from and looking for common ground. I've never deliberately and seriously insulted anyone in my life - not fascists, not anti-vaxxers, not climate change deniers. We all get our ideas from somewhere and it doesn't make us monsters.
I have two reservations, though:
1. One has to consider where one draws the line without abandoning the reason why one took up politics. I'm ready to listen sympathetically to people who dislike the speed of change and are afraid of it, including change caused by large-scale immigration. But if someone says to me that "Immigrants are dirty" or something like that (as I've occasionally experienced), I won't pretend to agree. I'll politely say that I think that's too generalised, and people in every group vary in how they look after themselves. If that puts the voter off, it can't be helped. Writ large, the party needs to show understanding and sympathy and address practical fears without mock-pandering.
2. How far are people actually winnable? I get that you'd like Labour to be electable. I get that Casino is sincere in wanting an opposition that he respects. But would either of you actually vote Labour? The risk that Starmer takes if he focuses on patriotism and traditional values is being generally accepted as a perfectly decent opposition leader, without actually winning, because people who put those valuues first feel (even) more at home with the Conservatives. They're pleased if other parties are a bit similar, without wanting to vote for them.
I think Starmer is absolutely right to work hard to reassure people about patriotism and respect. But when that's been reasonably broadly accepted, he needs to use that as a basis to move on to wider practical issues that change people's lives. Many people are willing to accept quite a left-wing programme if they feel OK about the general values.
It’s that late 5% Labour needs.
They don’t need to ignore or pander to racism to win them, they need to appeal to the values and issues important to this group (who tend to be white working class).
Would I vote Labour? Under the right circumstances, yes. It was not possible under Corbyn, and frankly under Miliband either. Starmer is more palatable than both of them.
Why not under Miliband?
Too wonky, lacked gravitas (at the time), made some stupid policy calls, too “beta”, stabbed his brother in the back etc.
Ok thanks. Certainly had image problems. He was too timid on policy imo. Don't know if you meant that but I agree if so.
I don’t think he was too timid per se.
I think he had the right instinct - which is that neo-liberal economics was passing its use-by date - but I think he then wonkified and triangulated that instinct to a pile of mush.
On whether Labour should be polling higher, yes I think they clearly should be looking at a decent and steady polling lead in the next year. They need substantial gains in the local elections in both 2021 and 2022 (they start from a modest base and it's important in terms of demonstrating progress from the Corbyn years as 2016, 2017 and 2018 were all on his watch).
There is a factor, though, which arguably means that they may not hit their peak in mid-term and tail off as is the usual pattern in the electoral cycle. That is that time is likely to be important in de-toxifying the brand post-Corbyn. Of course, Corbyn isn't the only unpopular predecessor that an opposition leader has followed on from, but the nature of his unpopularity was such that there's a decontamination exercise to go through rather than just "he was crap... who's next?" as with IDS or Kinnock for example.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
Yes, and once again goes to show that the government's priorities for testing and the vaccine being based around old people rather than key workers which includes delivery and freight.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
Scotland is an opportunity for Labour to make a bit of a comeback, they can surely beat the Tories for second.
Doubt it now Mr Starmer has come out all over HYUFD. That will piss off a fair proportion of his existing supporters, will it not? Labour is IIRC more split on Yes/No to Indy than any other mainstream party, even the littluns like the LDs.
I think it's worth bearing in mind that, despite everything, many Scots voters still harbour a fairly positive attitude to Labour. Although I don't expect that to manifest itself in too many votes next May, that latent sense could make an appearance at some point. And why not in 2024? Let's just suppose, that most Scottish voters don't have a long-lasting paroxysm of rage when Boris says no to IndyRef next year, and the Sturgeon administration lumbers along for another 4 years getting a few more scratches on the paintwork. By the time we get to a competitive GE in 2024 who knows what could happen? Maybe some of those formerly Lab supporters may give Labour another go, esp if a dose of federalism peels off some of the soft-Indy voters. By no means impossible.
At 60% for indy and more, sustained figures?
And with SLAB rather than SKS fronting?
And with the experience of Gordon Brown's promises of federalism till it came out of our ears (Labour, remember)?
One thought: what is SKS and post-Corbyn Labour vierw on Trident replacement? It's completely unwelcome in SLAB except of course Ms Baillie.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
Yes, and once again goes to show that the government's priorities for testing and the vaccine being based around old people rather than key workers which includes delivery and freight.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
Coronavirus, a case of the English variant in Loreto with no contacts with Great Britain
This is a person who had undergone a molecular swab in recent days for a severe cold. He is now in solitary confinement with his family 23 DECEMBER 2020 1 MINUTE READING A case of the so-called English variant of Covid-19 was detected in Loreto, in the province of Ancona. A partial sequence was identified by the Virology Laboratory of the Ospedali Riuniti of Ancona: it is a person who had no direct connections with Great Britain and who underwent a molecular swab in recent days because he had a severe cold and who now he is in isolation with his family. "In the meantime we have deepened the investigations - says the director of the Laboratory Stefano Menzo to Ansa - and now we know that it is the English variant".
On the "Vui 202012/01" now known as the "English variant" in recent days, in fact, there has been convulsive information on the extent and risks that the virus mutated on British soil could entail. The first analysis by the European Disease Control Agency a few days ago illustrates how "the unusually high number of mutations in the Spike protein and the high coverage of sequencing in the UK suggest that the variant did not emerge through a gradual accumulation of mutations "in Great Britain. Rather, one possible explanation is prolonged SARS-cov-2 infection in "a single patient, potentially with reduced immunocompetence". If this type of infection continues, European scientists write, "it can lead to the accumulation of immune runaway mutations at a high rate."
Another possibility, then, is that of "virus adaptation processes occurring in a different susceptible animal species, which is then re-transmitted to humans by host animals", as could have happened in the case of mink in Denmark. To date, the variant has been reported in Denmark, the Netherlands and "according to the media in Belgium", with a confirmed case also in Rome. Fortunately, the results of the studies showed that on this type of mutation "fears that it might escape vaccine-induced immunity can be allayed."
The English variant, announced in the House of Commons on December 14 by the health minister, Matt Hancock, would therefore seem "more contagious", and after a few days of skepticism on the part of scientists for the claim of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, about " 70 percent more broadcast "From the international point of view, the World Health Organization (WHO) told the BBC" to be in close contact with UK officials ".
It’s a misfortune for us to be best in the world at tracking mutations insisted the Daily Mail. (Though I suspect many other country’s around the world aren’t too far behind and they can all help one another)
The UK has contributed 47% of the global total of genomic maps - no other country comes remotely close is absolute terms and only the Danes do better in per-capita terms.
Perhaps time to note that Australia have decent capacity in sequencing, and yet have barely contributed.
That's very interestng and sounds about right. Labour's dilemma then is how to attract the racist homophobic vote without actively supporting racism and homophobia. Michelle Obama answers that well in her book. You don't. You just hope that education and example will move the next generation to see the world more generously.
Kind of how I see it too. Bit more than just hope though. You stay out of bleeding edge social issues - where you're too far ahead of the curve - and you make a big appeal to the economic self interest of those "socially conservative" (to use the PC phrase) working class voters who have gone blue. This is what I'm hoping to see from Starmer. He isn't Corbyn - who genuinely had a "patriotism" problem due to being steeped in anti-West protest politics - and just that fact goes most of the way he needs to on this. He does NOT need to start wearing cross of St George underpants outside his trousers. Or indeed inside them. The advice that he do so from well meaning Conservative posters (and I do accept the sincerity in Casino's case, albeit less so in others) should be politely declined.
To be fair, Ed M held the Red Wall. I think this idea that Starmer can't win it back is probably incorrect, I guess in time we will see how much was Corbyn + Brexit, I am going to guess it was a lot of it.
That was before 23 June 2016. Brexit has (sadly) changed the political landscape. I'm not writing off the Red Wall either - you can't do that - but what I'm saying is if winning it back requires the adoption of conservative social values in place of progressive ones, I don't want to go that route, and I also think it would be electorally very risky, given Labour's voting base these days is not that way inclined.
What counts as conservative social values or country-loving, though? The Britain of the 1950's? The 1980's? The 2000's? Now?
Great question. Brexit has a big nostalgia factor to it so perhaps the usual process whereby social values become more progressive and less conservative over time has been interrupted and has taken a little hop backwards.
Personally I don't buy the equation of love of country with social conservativism. I think it's a right wing talking point. Corbyn had a problem in this area, a life spent agitating against the Great Satan of the West, but he's gone now. Starmer should relax on this. He's clearly patriotic. No need to shout about it.
Love of country = Wanting it to be the best that it can be.
This does not entail getting into a frenzy about Macron and Fish, and all the rest of it. If that's your bag, vote Farage or Tory.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
Yes, and once again goes to show that the government's priorities for testing and the vaccine being based around old people rather than key workers which includes delivery and freight.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
Agree. What do you think of Blair’s idea?
Rubbish, we need to follow the science on vaccination. If the scientists say two doses are necessary then we need to give everyone two doses and just deal with the shortages that results in. What we don't want is for vaccines to only be partially effective because of the single dose and then we find we don't achieve herd immunity.
What we should be doing is helping the likes of Moderna, AZ and J&J to expand manufacturing of their vaccines in the UK, even if that means spending £300-400m for subsidies and then mothballing it in 2022. If supply is the bottleneck then fix that, don't mess around with the vaccine itself.
Mid November....if that is true, it will be everywhere, just like when it escaped Wuhan, even if the Chinese had been honest, it was well seeded in Italy already.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
How long will we hold out before rejoining customs union?
Since November 15 -- about the time the UK variant might have arrived in the US -- genetic sequencing has been done on viruses found in about 300 people in the United States and in about 9,000 in the UK, Worobey said.
"We're flying blind," Worobey said. "Maybe some other similarly interesting variant is sweeping up with high frequency, but we're just not seeing it."
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
Yes, and once again goes to show that the government's priorities for testing and the vaccine being based around old people rather than key workers which includes delivery and freight.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
I can understand it though. The optimal solution may well involve vaccinating bus drivers or truckers, but there would immediately be a big media storm about why industry X or service Y is excluded. The arguments would be endless and distracting.
Best just to do it as fast as possible with the smallest number of criteria.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
Yes, and once again goes to show that the government's priorities for testing and the vaccine being based around old people rather than key workers which includes delivery and freight.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
Completely disagreed.
The vaccinations are about easing pressure on the hospitals and mortuaries by vaccinating those most likely to get sick and hospitalised and die - and those most who work in superspreader jobs most likely to spread it to them.
How would vaccinating a Polish lorry driver who is in the UK today but Germany tomorrow and Sweden next week a great use of our limited vaccines?
The idea Sunak is excellent is rubbish. I’m sorry it just is.
The man who came up with Eat Out To Help Out is not competent.
Horse often less is more don’t become like some of our more persistent posters by commenting on everything and repeating yourself, eventually you just get ignored. Not a criticism just friendly advice
Where in the article does it say it was a charity case?
I suspect it means “smart German entrepreneur saw opportunity and paid Lufthansa to fly 80 tonnes of fresh food to the U.K.”
Where does it say “smart German entrepreneur saw opportunity and paid Lufthansa to fly 80 tonnes of fresh food to the U.K.”?
It just goes to show how little faith other countries have in the UK to look after those trapped, any idea what has been done for the beyond the charity work of the Sikhs?
I assume they have a bunch of Polish drivers stranded there and they are looking after them
Doing some good assuming the day...
It’s simply that I understand how governments work while you are trying to make cheap political points
The German government is not going to send food aid to the U.K. without being asked. Turns out that Lufthansa was working with some food forwarding companies on a commercial basis
The Polish government is not going to intervene and help general truckers in the U.K. but they do have a responsibility for the welfare of their citizens temporarily stuck in the U.K. and without a network or resources of their own
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
Yes, and once again goes to show that the government's priorities for testing and the vaccine being based around old people rather than key workers which includes delivery and freight.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
Agree. What do you think of Blair’s idea?
Rubbish, we need to follow the science on vaccination. If the scientists say two doses are necessary then we need to give everyone two doses and just deal with the shortages that results in. What we don't want is for vaccines to only be partially effective because of the single dose and then we find we don't achieve herd immunity.
What we should be doing is helping the likes of Moderna, AZ and J&J to expand manufacturing of their vaccines in the UK, even if that means spending £300-400m for subsidies and then mothballing it in 2022. If supply is the bottleneck then fix that, don't mess around with the vaccine itself.
Not just following the science, but you have to get the public to buy in. If you effectively start telling people you are only getting half the recommended dosage and it won't give you the 95%, I think you will find a lot of public distrust and outrage that the government is taking short cuts and in doing so perception that putting people's lives at risk.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
How long will we hold out before rejoining customs union?
Forever. We are never rejoining the customs union.
Rochdale needs to have a coffee and move on. That battle is over.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
Yes, and once again goes to show that the government's priorities for testing and the vaccine being based around old people rather than key workers which includes delivery and freight.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
I can understand it though. The optimal solution may well involve vaccinating bus drivers or truckers, but there would immediately be a big media storm about why industry X or service Y is excluded. The arguments would be endless and distracting.
Best just to do it as fast as possible with the smallest number of criteria.
Right now we haven't got a functioning economy in any sense of the word functional. We have limited vaccine supplies and we're saving 80-100 year olds as a priority while we have children starving becuase their parents are out of work. It's immoral.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
Yes, and once again goes to show that the government's priorities for testing and the vaccine being based around old people rather than key workers which includes delivery and freight.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
I can understand it though. The optimal solution may well involve vaccinating bus drivers or truckers, but there would immediately be a big media storm about why industry X or service Y is excluded. The arguments would be endless and distracting.
Best just to do it as fast as possible with the smallest number of criteria.
Right now we haven't got a functioning economy in any sense of the word functional. We have limited vaccine supplies and we're saving 80-100 year olds as a priority while we have children starving becuase their parents are out of work. It's immoral.
Right now the only reason people are out of work is because of restrictions to stop those 80-100 year olds getting sick. Those 80-100 year olds form more than a quarter of all hospitalisation.
Vaccinate them and that will slash hospitalisations and slash restrictions far more than vaccinating Polish lorry drivers who happen to be in the UK for maybe a day or two a week if that will do.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
Yes, and once again goes to show that the government's priorities for testing and the vaccine being based around old people rather than key workers which includes delivery and freight.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
I can understand it though. The optimal solution may well involve vaccinating bus drivers or truckers, but there would immediately be a big media storm about why industry X or service Y is excluded. The arguments would be endless and distracting.
Best just to do it as fast as possible with the smallest number of criteria.
Right now we haven't got a functioning economy in any sense of the word functional. We have limited vaccine supplies and we're saving 80-100 year olds as a priority while we have children starving becuase their parents are out of work. It's immoral.
But this is where Blair’s idea (as I understand it) is good.
Vaccine *both* groups with a first dose, and ramp up production in time to ensure delivery of the second dose.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
How long will we hold out before rejoining customs union?
Forever. We are never rejoining the customs union.
Rochdale needs to have a coffee and move on. That battle is over.
Is that a genuine prediction or merely your personal bias?
It isn't exactly fanciful to suggest a future government may see a closer trading relationship with continental Europe as desirable and go down that road. It might or might not be the right thing to do, but it's hardly some kind of Remaniac fantasy to suggest it's possible, even probable at some point.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
How long will we hold out before rejoining customs union?
Forever. We are never rejoining the customs union.
Rochdale needs to have a coffee and move on. That battle is over.
Is that a genuine prediction or merely your personal bias?
It isn't exactly fanciful to suggest a future government may see a closer trading relationship with continental Europe as desirable and go down that road. It might or might not be the right thing to do, but it's hardly some kind of Remaniac fantasy to suggest it's possible, even probable at some point.
Genuine prediction. We're signing trade agreements around the world now, we'd need to renounce them if we rejoined the customs union.
Once we're through any disruption with Europe and have new trade agreements with the Rest of the World then that changes the dynamics dramatically. There is a very good reason why even the EFTA nations are not in a customs union with the EU.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
It’s a misfortune for us to be best in the world at tracking mutations insisted the Daily Mail. (Though I suspect many other country’s around the world aren’t too far behind and they can all help one another)
The UK has contributed 47% of the global total of genomic maps - no other country comes remotely close is absolute terms and only the Danes do better in per-capita terms.
This is a graphic showing how we beat the world. Why isn’t China and Russia on this list?
Christ on a bike...I didn't think Tenet was particularly good, but it didn't cause me to have a meltdown that it was crap because of colenial, classism, racism....that the director.went to the "wrong" school, too much mediocre whiteness, yadda yadda yadda.
Some people must be one accidental viewing of a episode of rising damp from being so triggered that they self-combust.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
How long will we hold out before rejoining customs union?
Forever. We are never rejoining the customs union.
Rochdale needs to have a coffee and move on. That battle is over.
Is that a genuine prediction or merely your personal bias?
It isn't exactly fanciful to suggest a future government may see a closer trading relationship with continental Europe as desirable and go down that road. It might or might not be the right thing to do, but it's hardly some kind of Remaniac fantasy to suggest it's possible, even probable at some point.
Genuine prediction. We're signing trade agreements around the world now, we'd need to renounce them if we rejoined the customs union.
Once we're through any disruption with Europe and have new trade agreements with the Rest of the World then that changes the dynamics dramatically. There is a very good reason why even the EFTA nations are not in a customs union with the EU.
They're largely cut and paste jobs with the most trivial of tweaks. I agree that it could be the case in 20 or 30 years time that there has been substantial divergence in the structures of the continental European and UK economies, and deals have moved on a long way, and this might make a customs union difficult. But we're nowhere near that at present. We're looking at losing the opportunity to sell trivial amounts of Stilton into a market that doesn't really buy cheese.
Well that's the uni vote maintained, sadly they don't vote and/or vote in the wrong places
A friend who is a keen follower of the virus just contacted me and said she was watching the select committee on Covid and the Tory members for the most part were well informed (particularly Greg Clark) but the Labour ones were hopeless. She specifically named Dawn Butler.
The lack of talent in the parliamentary party could well be Starmer's achilles heel.
Note the Tories on the select committees are often the sensible ones who should be the cabinet! Excluded from the cabinet as not kneeling at the Johnson altar so select committees are their natural habitat this parliament. They are not representative of the Tory MPs as a whole.
Eat out to help out was a genius policy, God knows how many jobs it has saved in the hospitality industry. Sunak is the only guy in parliament who looks like a PM in waiting IMO. Only 40 years old too.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
How long will we hold out before rejoining customs union?
I don't know - there is a fundamental lack of understanding on the subject: 1. We hold all the cards - the EU will let us through 2. German car manufacturers need us too much - the EU will let us through 3. We've had enough of experts. As Philip rightly says they can all be ignored 4. If we get a deal it means we Win which means we carry on like before only Better
The reason why you create a customs union is to remove the physical border. By physical border I mean a barrier where traffic has to stop for inspection by customs officers. Even if we agreed the kind of standstill deal that Shagger insists we won't sign (we might - he is a liar...) if we want full checks then that creates the problem. And we DO want the checks apparently.
Unless the deal is that we maintain complete alignment with the EU and do not have a physical border - and it almost certainly won't be - then our border with the EU will cease to function. You cannot process 10k trucks a day each way through a physical border. Do the maths. 10k trucks (per day each way) x 45 minutes (average crossing time at external EU borders) per truck = 312 man days on each side of the border assuming an even flow of vehicles 24 hours a day. As we have a sea crossing between the two sides of the border those vehicles cannot queue to the border which means they get corralled in Kent / Pas-de-Calais.
Operation Brock will do two things. Vehicles bound for the Channel Tunnel will be queued first on the M20 between Junctions 8 and 9, then at Ashford, then there was an M26 option previously looked at. Vehicles bound for Dover go to Manston, then into an M20 style queue on both the A256 and A2. So at these locations they will need to provide food, toilets, showers.
They will not. Because despite Brock existing the cabinet still think nothing will happen.
Seems like a small swing to Labour, MoE though so in reality both parties remain tied?
From Greens and LDs - Tory vote is stable. Quite remarkable in the sense that for the umpteenth time it shows how out of touch are both the media and indeed many PB commenters. The dissonance they must feel may be what contributes to some of their outlandish commentary we see on here and elsewhere.
The person who lives in Spain lectures people in the UK about being “out of touch”. Right.
There’s nothing “out of touch” about not agreeing with Conservatives when only 40% of the population even supports them.
Lol - it's very instructive to view the UK from a distance. Gives another perspective. I'm sorry that the polling upsets you but if you are satisfied with Labour's polling in the midst of both the pandemic and the Brexit shambles more power to your elbow though - could keep Labour out of power for another 20 years with luck.
So are you saying Labour should be polling higher? Maybe three points higher but then any higher and they're beating Blair.
Now I am wanting Labour to win a super majority as much as the next guy but I think that's extremely likely. Labour's polling is probably as good as it could be, no?
Ed Miliband was 10 points ahead of the Coalition by 2012. And he went on to lose.
For Labour to really look like winning, my guess is that they need to be recording 10+ point leads over the next year.
But there are still concerns for Labour. While Miliband's approval ratings are up, he still lags stubbornly behind Cameron on the "future prime minister" question. And it's worth noting that these polls can't be the most representative we've had in recent weeks because they include the bank holiday weekend.
But perhaps I am wrong, I go with my tail between my legs
No problem.
My opinion is that the next election is likely to be fought on the economic response to COVID, which is probably Labour friendly turf.
At the moment, I think Keir Starmer is a more intelligent Neil Kinnock -- he will make inroads in the Tory seat numbers, but I doubt he will win a majority. Also, I strongly suspect he won't be up against Boris.
But, without progress in Scotland, Labour will struggle in the long term. And it is not just seat numbers, it is the intellectual heft of Scottish Labour (Donald Dewar, Robin Cook, John Smith) that has gone as well. I don't see Keir being nimble enough or smart enough to undo all the damage in Scotland.
The Welsh seats are decreasing, so Labour will do well to stand still in Wales in terms of seats at the next GE.
Also, as I hope I have stressed on this blog, Labour can't keep screwing up in Government in Wales for ever -- there will be an electoral cost eventually, though it may come all of a sudden as it came to SLAB.
Deeply unpleasant way to behave - publicly shaming your father.
Poor guy will never be able to show his face on Twitter again. We had a couple of old blokes dropping off a piano for us last week, who invited themselves to stay for a coffee and a bit of light racism. But they also told us a story about Prince Michael of Kent too libelous to repeat here so I let them off.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Where do you stand on moving those who thought they were in front of queue to other part of the queue? With days of planning Could there have been better effort to get some multi-linguists down there to communicate the plan?
As for the crux of Casino_Royale's point, I've often spoken about that myself. I don't agree that the solution is to out social conservative Labour (which Labour can't ever do anyway), the solution is to not get involved in culture wars.
Blair was very good on this topic.
I am not calling for Labour to “out socially conservative” the Tories. Just to attack them on issues which are currently seen as “right”.
Remember tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime?
That, for starters.
Yes that was good. However new Labour in government had some bad habits . Such as announcing half baked plans every week, like the police marching people down to cash points for instant justice on minor breaches of the law. I am sure SkS is more considered in his views.
Yeh, well that’s why I vote LD. However, I want to see this government defeated and it is essential that Labour is seen as electable again.
It's an interesting discussion and I'm not blind to the points that you, Sean Fear, Casino and others are making. I won a seat that had had a Tory majority of 17,000 (29%) just 10 years earlier and held it for 13 years by paying unrelenting attention to constituents as people, never giving up on a single one of them and always trying to understand where they were coming from and looking for common ground. I've never deliberately and seriously insulted anyone in my life - not fascists, not anti-vaxxers, not climate change deniers. We all get our ideas from somewhere and it doesn't make us monsters.
I have two reservations, though:
1. One has to consider where one draws the line without abandoning the reason why one took up politics. I'm ready to listen sympathetically to people who dislike the speed of change and are afraid of it, including change caused by large-scale immigration. But if someone says to me that "Immigrants are dirty" or something like that (as I've occasionally experienced), I won't pretend to agree. I'll politely say that I think that's too generalised, and people in every group vary in how they look after themselves. If that puts the voter off, it can't be helped. Writ large, the party needs to show understanding and sympathy and address practical fears without mock-pandering.
2. How far are people actually winnable? I get that you'd like Labour to be electable. I get that Casino is sincere in wanting an opposition that he respects. But would either of you actually vote Labour? The risk that Starmer takes if he focuses on patriotism and traditional values is being generally accepted as a perfectly decent opposition leader, without actually winning, because people who put those valuues first feel (even) more at home with the Conservatives. They're pleased if other parties are a bit similar, without wanting to vote for them.
I think Starmer is absolutely right to work hard to reassure people about patriotism and respect. But when that's been reasonably broadly accepted, he needs to use that as a basis to move on to wider practical issues that change people's lives. Many people are willing to accept quite a left-wing programme if they feel OK about the general values.
You’d expect that the experience of 2020 (or 2020/1) would make people more open to - and indeed eager for - collective solutions, pace 1948. There isn’t too much evidence of that at the moment, but then we’re still in the midst of the struggle rather than contemplating what sort of world we might desire afterwards.
All that the crisis has done so far is push the Tories to abandon their individualism and pick all the fruit from the long sought money tree.
Neither LibDems nor Labour is really rising to the challenge of mapping out their visions for a better world for afterwards. Maybe now isn’t the time to be promoting it, but it is certainly the time to be thinking about it.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
How long will we hold out before rejoining customs union?
Forever. We are never rejoining the customs union.
Rochdale needs to have a coffee and move on. That battle is over.
Coffee love? I have a vat of popcorn.
We absolutely never will rejoin the customs union. Instead we will create A customs union like Turkey did.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
Average processing time 45 minutes per vehicle with 20 hour queues for borders within the Common Transit Convention?
Or are you falsely comparing with borders outside the Common Transit Convention?
Well that's the uni vote maintained, sadly they don't vote and/or vote in the wrong places
A friend who is a keen follower of the virus just contacted me and said she was watching the select committee on Covid and the Tory members for the most part were well informed (particularly Greg Clark) but the Labour ones were hopeless. She specifically named Dawn Butler.
The lack of talent in the parliamentary party could well be Starmer's achilles heel.
Note the Tories on the select committees are often the sensible ones who should be the cabinet! Excluded from the cabinet as not kneeling at the Johnson altar so select committees are their natural habitat this parliament. They are not representative of the Tory MPs as a whole.
On topic, I understand its a commercial site and all that, but given the amount of frustration and worse expressed about Betfair settling the US presidential markets by the majority on here, I am not sure how that is consistent with promoting ambiguous Smarkets bets - a site where the arbiters may well be the biggest position takers. Caveat emptor.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
How long will we hold out before rejoining customs union?
Forever. We are never rejoining the customs union.
Rochdale needs to have a coffee and move on. That battle is over.
Is that a genuine prediction or merely your personal bias?
It isn't exactly fanciful to suggest a future government may see a closer trading relationship with continental Europe as desirable and go down that road. It might or might not be the right thing to do, but it's hardly some kind of Remaniac fantasy to suggest it's possible, even probable at some point.
Genuine prediction. We're signing trade agreements around the world now, we'd need to renounce them if we rejoined the customs union.
We're signing continuity trade deals around the world to roll over their existing deals with the EU. Renouncing them to replace them with the old agreement won't be an issue.
Well that's the uni vote maintained, sadly they don't vote and/or vote in the wrong places
A friend who is a keen follower of the virus just contacted me and said she was watching the select committee on Covid and the Tory members for the most part were well informed (particularly Greg Clark) but the Labour ones were hopeless. She specifically named Dawn Butler.
The lack of talent in the parliamentary party could well be Starmer's achilles heel.
Note the Tories on the select committees are often the sensible ones who should be the cabinet! Excluded from the cabinet as not kneeling at the Johnson altar so select committees are their natural habitat this parliament. They are not representative of the Tory MPs as a whole.
Hunt, for example, is chair of the committee.
A more cunning PM would have offered Hunt the vaccine roll out job. If it goes tits up, Hunt is in the tent and gets the blame, goes well and Boris still gets to claim the glory.
And besides actually Hunt knows the NHS inside out and is the best man for the job.of those available.
Labour still behind the Tories in the polls. For all Boris's current headaches Starmer and Labour certainly aren't one of them.
They will be more worried by the reports Richard Tice will be running for London Mayor this year.
He won;t win of course, but how much can he take our of Bailey's vote? could he even beat Bailey?
I'm not even sure they're bothering with Mayor this time round. They know its a lost cause with Bailey. Turnout will be pretty poor.
There's losing and there's humiliation though, isn't there? I don't think Bailey is in any significant danger of losing second place but clearly, if he did, that would be a story. Him coming second with 30-35% of the first round vote is a non-story.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
How long will we hold out before rejoining customs union?
Forever. We are never rejoining the customs union.
Rochdale needs to have a coffee and move on. That battle is over.
Is that a genuine prediction or merely your personal bias?
It isn't exactly fanciful to suggest a future government may see a closer trading relationship with continental Europe as desirable and go down that road. It might or might not be the right thing to do, but it's hardly some kind of Remaniac fantasy to suggest it's possible, even probable at some point.
Genuine prediction. We're signing trade agreements around the world now, we'd need to renounce them if we rejoined the customs union.
Once we're through any disruption with Europe and have new trade agreements with the Rest of the World then that changes the dynamics dramatically. There is a very good reason why even the EFTA nations are not in a customs union with the EU.
They're largely cut and paste jobs with the most trivial of tweaks. I agree that it could be the case in 20 or 30 years time that there has been substantial divergence in the structures of the continental European and UK economies, and deals have moved on a long way, and this might make a customs union difficult. But we're nowhere near that at present. We're looking at losing the opportunity to sell trivial amounts of Stilton into a market that doesn't really buy cheese.
Talks are already underway with quite a few countries to get new agreements. Forget 20-30 years, 2-3 is a more realistic timescale with the way the fantastic Truss is working if she stays in the Trade Department.
In particular talks are getting advanced with a fair few countries in liberating trade restrictions on Services like Finance etc that are our key exports and something the EU has not prioritised in its agreements.
Interesting to note though that at the bottom of the article the egregious Ladhani is rowing back on his previous claims and now stating the causal link is not yet established.
I think it's absolutely shameful that the government are relying on charity to ensure that truck drivers aren't going hungry because of a situation of their own creation.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
Completely agree
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present. OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time. These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
Yes, and once again goes to show that the government's priorities for testing and the vaccine being based around old people rather than key workers which includes delivery and freight.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
Completely disagreed.
The vaccinations are about easing pressure on the hospitals and mortuaries by vaccinating those most likely to get sick and hospitalised and die - and those most who work in superspreader jobs most likely to spread it to them.
How would vaccinating a Polish lorry driver who is in the UK today but Germany tomorrow and Sweden next week a great use of our limited vaccines?
Because that polish driver brings fresh food into the country and we can't afford for that supply chain to break down.
A more cunning PM would have offered Hunt the vaccine roll out job. If it goes tits up, Hunt is in the tent and gets the blame, goes well and Boris still gets to claim the glory.
And besides actually Hunt knows the NHS inside out and is the best man for the job.of those available.
That BoZo appointed a lacky from the extreme Brexit end of the spectrum is therefore revealing.
The fundamental point about these figures (and others that have shown the same, for years), is that Labour wins among people of working age, and loses, big time, when they retire (though obviously many do continue to work after 65). The act of retiring does seem to produce a change in values - and that applies to many of my generation who grew up as thoroughly left-wing. I don't fully understand it - I get that things like child benefit and employment rights cease to feel personally important if you're 70, but that can't be the whole story. Nor do people of my age generally become socially illiberal - all my contemporaries that I know are fine with gay marriage, women priests, etc. But they start to become...uneasy about change.
You’re only looking at one dimension - the life circumstances of being older - and not the other, which is that most people form their political outlook in their late teens and early 20s, and continue to see subsequent politics through that prism for the rest of their lives. The younger cohort of pensioners came to political maturity during the 1970s, which will surely be part of the explanation for their voting behaviour subsequently.
If I was a polish lorry driver (for example) when someone wants a load delivered to UK in new year I would be putting a pretty high extra premium on the costs for the risk involved. Or just flatly refusing.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The queues from 1st Jan won't go away if we sod fish and do a deal. We are leaving the customs union. We have required France to join us imposing a hard border at a crossing than does up to 10k trucks a day each way.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
How long will we hold out before rejoining customs union?
I don't know - there is a fundamental lack of understanding on the subject: 1. We hold all the cards - the EU will let us through 2. German car manufacturers need us too much - the EU will let us through 3. We've had enough of experts. As Philip rightly says they can all be ignored 4. If we get a deal it means we Win which means we carry on like before only Better
The reason why you create a customs union is to remove the physical border. By physical border I mean a barrier where traffic has to stop for inspection by customs officers. Even if we agreed the kind of standstill deal that Shagger insists we won't sign (we might - he is a liar...) if we want full checks then that creates the problem. And we DO want the checks apparently.
Unless the deal is that we maintain complete alignment with the EU and do not have a physical border - and it almost certainly won't be - then our border with the EU will cease to function. You cannot process 10k trucks a day each way through a physical border. Do the maths. 10k trucks (per day each way) x 45 minutes (average crossing time at external EU borders) per truck = 312 man days on each side of the border assuming an even flow of vehicles 24 hours a day. As we have a sea crossing between the two sides of the border those vehicles cannot queue to the border which means they get corralled in Kent / Pas-de-Calais.
Operation Brock will do two things. Vehicles bound for the Channel Tunnel will be queued first on the M20 between Junctions 8 and 9, then at Ashford, then there was an M26 option previously looked at. Vehicles bound for Dover go to Manston, then into an M20 style queue on both the A256 and A2. So at these locations they will need to provide food, toilets, showers.
They will not. Because despite Brock existing the cabinet still think nothing will happen.
What evidence do you have that it takes 45 minutes with the EU borders within the Common Transit Convention which we are members of in our own right (and will remain so even under No Deal)?
You seem to be contrasting our arrangements with non-CTC nations which is a bit of a schoolboy error.
Deeply unpleasant way to behave - publicly shaming your father.
Poor guy will never be able to show his face on Twitter again. We had a couple of old blokes dropping off a piano for us last week, who invited themselves to stay for a coffee and a bit of light racism. But they also told us a story about Prince Michael of Kent too libelous to repeat here so I let them off.
I don't think she was shaming her father, just compassionately describing him. My dad is a couple of decades older than hers (mid 70s) and is what I would describe as passively racist and homophobic. He doesn't actively dislike people, but he absolutely sees them as different and labels them as such. If he went to see a doctor they'll be described as an asian doctor (if they are BAME obviously). And he has for decades told stories about the "wooly woofters" he worked with at Manchester council. Which is why he has no idea he has a bisexual son and a bi/pansexual (depends what mood he's in) grandson.
So I totally got what she was saying. Its not people who are monsters. It is ordinary people stuck in a time that has happily receded into the past. I don't think it is right to try and apply 2020 morality onto people from previous generations, but I do try to help educate my dad (gently) by pointing out that they can't say things like that any more.
It is a real problem for Labour - people who feel the world they are comfortable in having slipped away from them. Its also a problem for the Tories pandering to their prejudices...
As for the crux of Casino_Royale's point, I've often spoken about that myself. I don't agree that the solution is to out social conservative Labour (which Labour can't ever do anyway), the solution is to not get involved in culture wars.
Blair was very good on this topic.
I am not calling for Labour to “out socially conservative” the Tories. Just to attack them on issues which are currently seen as “right”.
Remember tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime?
That, for starters.
Yes that was good. However new Labour in government had some bad habits . Such as announcing half baked plans every week, like the police marching people down to cash points for instant justice on minor breaches of the law. I am sure SkS is more considered in his views.
Yeh, well that’s why I vote LD. However, I want to see this government defeated and it is essential that Labour is seen as electable again.
It's an interesting discussion and I'm not blind to the points that you, Sean Fear, Casino and others are making. I won a seat that had had a Tory majority of 17,000 (29%) just 10 years earlier and held it for 13 years by paying unrelenting attention to constituents as people, never giving up on a single one of them and always trying to understand where they were coming from and looking for common ground. I've never deliberately and seriously insulted anyone in my life - not fascists, not anti-vaxxers, not climate change deniers. We all get our ideas from somewhere and it doesn't make us monsters.
I have two reservations, though:
1. One has to consider where one draws the line without abandoning the reason why one took up politics. I'm ready to listen sympathetically to people who dislike the speed of change and are afraid of it, including change caused by large-scale immigration. But if someone says to me that "Immigrants are dirty" or something like that (as I've occasionally experienced), I won't pretend to agree. I'll politely say that I think that's too generalised, and people in every group vary in how they look after themselves. If that puts the voter off, it can't be helped. Writ large, the party needs to show understanding and sympathy and address practical fears without mock-pandering.
2. How far are people actually winnable? I get that you'd like Labour to be electable. I get that Casino is sincere in wanting an opposition that he respects. But would either of you actually vote Labour? The risk that Starmer takes if he focuses on patriotism and traditional values is being generally accepted as a perfectly decent opposition leader, without actually winning, because people who put those valuues first feel (even) more at home with the Conservatives. They're pleased if other parties are a bit similar, without wanting to vote for them.
I think Starmer is absolutely right to work hard to reassure people about patriotism and respect. But when that's been reasonably broadly accepted, he needs to use that as a basis to move on to wider practical issues that change people's lives. Many people are willing to accept quite a left-wing programme if they feel OK about the general values.
You’d expect that the experience of 2020 (or 2020/1) would make people more open to - and indeed eager for - collective solutions, pace 1948. There isn’t too much evidence of that at the moment, but then we’re still in the midst of the struggle rather than contemplating what sort of world we might desire afterwards.
All that the crisis has done so far is push the Tories to abandon their individualism and pick all the fruit from the long sought money tree.
Neither LibDems nor Labour is really rising to the challenge of mapping out their visions for a better world for afterwards. Maybe now isn’t the time to be promoting it, but it is certainly the time to be thinking about it.
Spot on, centrists and the centre left politicians are not yet coming up with solutions that drive enthusiasm and vision. Green technology should be at the heart of their plans for the UK's future. We would be very good at it, although hopefully can retain more of the businesses than we have done from UK scientific achievements in the last 50 odd years.
Comments
And still lost.
Let's just suppose, that most Scottish voters don't have a long-lasting paroxysm of rage when Boris says no to IndyRef next year, and the Sturgeon administration lumbers along for another 4 years getting a few more scratches on the paintwork. By the time we get to a competitive GE in 2024 who knows what could happen? Maybe some of those formerly Lab supporters may give Labour another go, esp if a dose of federalism peels off some of the soft-Indy voters. By no means impossible.
Good on Khalsa Aid for recognising it and helping out but it shouldn't have been necessary.
For Labour to really look like winning, my guess is that they need to be recording 10+ point leads over the next year.
the point isn't wrong though.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/12/23/vaccine-wont-protect-us-economic-disaster-lockdowns/
Do a Biden? Not so easy since there isn't a Trump. But I do totally get the importance of the Red Wall. My view is we should try and win it back with economic policies that clearly benefit those voters in those places.
Scotland is such a toughie for Labour. Although I personally think Sindy is coming so longer term it won't be. For 2024, no coalitions, but I don't think it's wise to rule out any arrangement with the SNP since it might be the only route to government.
You talk about the "Corbynite" base, btw, but I don't think it is Corbynite. I'm talking about the millions of 45 and under socially liberal metropolitans who vote Labour. They don't need a Corbyn to do that. Starmer is fine. But he'd be less fine if he morphs into Frank Field.
https://tinyurl.com/y79kzn74
Journalists, fight fight fight!
https://twitter.com/cakeylaura/status/1341412374792835073?s=19
But there are still concerns for Labour. While Miliband's approval ratings are up, he still lags stubbornly behind Cameron on the "future prime minister" question. And it's worth noting that these polls can't be the most representative we've had in recent weeks because they include the bank holiday weekend.
But perhaps I am wrong, I go with my tail between my legs
The unbelievable thing is that this has obviously been partially prepared for with the possibility of no deal Brexit being ever present.
OK, hauliers can sleep in their cabs and frequently do - so a hotel perhaps isn't needed, but food and toilet facilities clearly are if people are stuck there any length of time.
These aren't people travelling here because they're on a jolly or economic migrants or anything of the sort. They're delivering the food and goods that we all rely on. And Macron might be blocking their return, and yes we're in a pandemic (Which makes adequate facilities even more pressing) but I reiterate these are people this country can't really do without. And the Gov'ts attitude and lack of action, whether borne through incompetence or otherwise has been disgraceful.
No doubt Gove has thought all this through in his meticulous No Deal planning.
Meanwhile, we hold out for a few more fish.
The lack of talent in the parliamentary party could well be Starmer's achilles heel.
Dawn Butler is one of them.
The biggest reason for me is you look at Labour and they have no depth, no ministers close to the calibre of the Blair ministry. The Tories are a mixed bag, they have a full range from excellent (Sunak) to awful (Williamson). Even in the darkest hour there's nothing and no one to suggest Labour will make a better first of things, and the worst part for them is I think a lot of the shadow cabinet are aware of this. At least with Corbyn's team there was a false sense of confidence and a belief in their own abilities. With Dodds, Thomas Symonds and many others I think they know they're nowhere near ready to take on the responsibility of government.
I think he had the right instinct - which is that neo-liberal economics was passing its use-by date - but I think he then wonkified and triangulated that instinct to a pile of mush.
There is a factor, though, which arguably means that they may not hit their peak in mid-term and tail off as is the usual pattern in the electoral cycle. That is that time is likely to be important in de-toxifying the brand post-Corbyn. Of course, Corbyn isn't the only unpopular predecessor that an opposition leader has followed on from, but the nature of his unpopularity was such that there's a decontamination exercise to go through rather than just "he was crap... who's next?" as with IDS or Kinnock for example.
The man who came up with Eat Out To Help Out is not competent.
https://www.amazon.co.uk/Driving-Force-Food-Evolution-Future/dp/0749306688
Eat Out To Help Out was the right idea at the time. One of more clever Treasury whizzes.
I find his self-promotion appalling however, and he is all to glib. Plus, he seems to be a covidiot long after actual evidence made that untenable.
Everything the government is doing is to avoid bad headlines from the daily mail ("my granny died but truckers have been vaccinated") but it means we have got rubbish policy as a result.
And with SLAB rather than SKS fronting?
And with the experience of Gordon Brown's promises of federalism till it came out of our ears (Labour, remember)?
One thought: what is SKS and post-Corbyn Labour vierw on Trident replacement? It's completely unwelcome in SLAB except of course Ms Baillie.
Average processing time at external EU land border crossings is 45 minutes per vehicle. Which creates queues of 20 hours plus elsewhere with a fraction of our throughput.
Deal or no deal, the queues will be there and will be catastrophic.
What do you think of Blair’s idea?
Coronavirus, a case of the English variant in Loreto with no contacts with Great Britain
This is a person who had undergone a molecular swab in recent days for a severe cold. He is now in solitary confinement with his family
23 DECEMBER 2020
1 MINUTE READING
A case of the so-called English variant of Covid-19 was detected in Loreto, in the province of Ancona. A partial sequence was identified by the Virology Laboratory of the Ospedali Riuniti of Ancona: it is a person who had no direct connections with Great Britain and who underwent a molecular swab in recent days because he had a severe cold and who now he is in isolation with his family. "In the meantime we have deepened the investigations - says the director of the Laboratory Stefano Menzo to Ansa - and now we know that it is the English variant".
On the "Vui 202012/01" now known as the "English variant" in recent days, in fact, there has been convulsive information on the extent and risks that the virus mutated on British soil could entail. The first analysis by the European Disease Control Agency a few days ago illustrates how "the unusually high number of mutations in the Spike protein and the high coverage of sequencing in the UK suggest that the variant did not emerge through a gradual accumulation of mutations "in Great Britain. Rather, one possible explanation is prolonged SARS-cov-2 infection in "a single patient, potentially with reduced immunocompetence". If this type of infection continues, European scientists write, "it can lead to the accumulation of immune runaway mutations at a high rate."
Another possibility, then, is that of "virus adaptation processes occurring in a different susceptible animal species, which is then re-transmitted to humans by host animals", as could have happened in the case of mink in Denmark. To date, the variant has been reported in Denmark, the Netherlands and "according to the media in Belgium", with a confirmed case also in Rome. Fortunately, the results of the studies showed that on this type of mutation "fears that it might escape vaccine-induced immunity can be allayed."
The English variant, announced in the House of Commons on December 14 by the health minister, Matt Hancock, would therefore seem "more contagious", and after a few days of skepticism on the part of scientists for the claim of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, about " 70 percent more broadcast "From the international point of view, the World Health Organization (WHO) told the BBC" to be in close contact with UK officials ".
https://www.repubblica.it/cronaca/2020/12/23/news/coronavirus_un_caso_della_variante_inglese_a_loreto_senza_contatti_con_la_gran_bretagna-279583655/?ref=RHTP-BH-I279341286-P1-S1-T1
I’d prefer we were more like them.
He won;t win of course, but how much can he take our of Bailey's vote? could he even beat Bailey?
https://us.cnn.com/2020/12/22/health/uk-coronavirus-variant-surveillance/index.html
Personally I don't buy the equation of love of country with social conservativism. I think it's a right wing talking point. Corbyn had a problem in this area, a life spent agitating against the Great Satan of the West, but he's gone now. Starmer should relax on this. He's clearly patriotic. No need to shout about it.
Love of country = Wanting it to be the best that it can be.
This does not entail getting into a frenzy about Macron and Fish, and all the rest of it. If that's your bag, vote Farage or Tory.
Alas, we do not live in a just world.
What we should be doing is helping the likes of Moderna, AZ and J&J to expand manufacturing of their vaccines in the UK, even if that means spending £300-400m for subsidies and then mothballing it in 2022. If supply is the bottleneck then fix that, don't mess around with the vaccine itself.
"We're flying blind," Worobey said. "Maybe some other similarly interesting variant is sweeping up with high frequency, but we're just not seeing it."
Best just to do it as fast as possible with the smallest number of criteria.
The vaccinations are about easing pressure on the hospitals and mortuaries by vaccinating those most likely to get sick and hospitalised and die - and those most who work in superspreader jobs most likely to spread it to them.
How would vaccinating a Polish lorry driver who is in the UK today but Germany tomorrow and Sweden next week a great use of our limited vaccines?
The German government is not going to send food aid to the U.K. without being asked. Turns out that Lufthansa was working with some food forwarding companies on a commercial basis
The Polish government is not going to intervene and help general truckers in the U.K. but they do have a responsibility for the welfare of their citizens temporarily stuck in the U.K. and without a network or resources of their own
Rochdale needs to have a coffee and move on. That battle is over.
Vaccinate them and that will slash hospitalisations and slash restrictions far more than vaccinating Polish lorry drivers who happen to be in the UK for maybe a day or two a week if that will do.
Vaccine *both* groups with a first dose, and ramp up production in time to ensure delivery of the second dose.
It isn't exactly fanciful to suggest a future government may see a closer trading relationship with continental Europe as desirable and go down that road. It might or might not be the right thing to do, but it's hardly some kind of Remaniac fantasy to suggest it's possible, even probable at some point.
Once we're through any disruption with Europe and have new trade agreements with the Rest of the World then that changes the dynamics dramatically. There is a very good reason why even the EFTA nations are not in a customs union with the EU.
Some people must be one accidental viewing of a episode of rising damp from being so triggered that they self-combust.
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/tenet-christopher-nolan-amazon-prime-b1777372.html
1. We hold all the cards - the EU will let us through
2. German car manufacturers need us too much - the EU will let us through
3. We've had enough of experts. As Philip rightly says they can all be ignored
4. If we get a deal it means we Win which means we carry on like before only Better
The reason why you create a customs union is to remove the physical border. By physical border I mean a barrier where traffic has to stop for inspection by customs officers. Even if we agreed the kind of standstill deal that Shagger insists we won't sign (we might - he is a liar...) if we want full checks then that creates the problem. And we DO want the checks apparently.
Unless the deal is that we maintain complete alignment with the EU and do not have a physical border - and it almost certainly won't be - then our border with the EU will cease to function. You cannot process 10k trucks a day each way through a physical border. Do the maths. 10k trucks (per day each way) x 45 minutes (average crossing time at external EU borders) per truck = 312 man days on each side of the border assuming an even flow of vehicles 24 hours a day. As we have a sea crossing between the two sides of the border those vehicles cannot queue to the border which means they get corralled in Kent / Pas-de-Calais.
Operation Brock will do two things. Vehicles bound for the Channel Tunnel will be queued first on the M20 between Junctions 8 and 9, then at Ashford, then there was an M26 option previously looked at. Vehicles bound for Dover go to Manston, then into an M20 style queue on both the A256 and A2. So at these locations they will need to provide food, toilets, showers.
They will not. Because despite Brock existing the cabinet still think nothing will happen.
My opinion is that the next election is likely to be fought on the economic response to COVID, which is probably Labour friendly turf.
At the moment, I think Keir Starmer is a more intelligent Neil Kinnock -- he will make inroads in the Tory seat numbers, but I doubt he will win a majority. Also, I strongly suspect he won't be up against Boris.
But, without progress in Scotland, Labour will struggle in the long term. And it is not just seat numbers, it is the intellectual heft of Scottish Labour (Donald Dewar, Robin Cook, John Smith) that has gone as well. I don't see Keir being nimble enough or smart enough to undo all the damage in Scotland.
The Welsh seats are decreasing, so Labour will do well to stand still in Wales in terms of seats at the next GE.
Also, as I hope I have stressed on this blog, Labour can't keep screwing up in Government in Wales for ever -- there will be an electoral cost eventually, though it may come all of a sudden as it came to SLAB.
We had a couple of old blokes dropping off a piano for us last week, who invited themselves to stay for a coffee and a bit of light racism. But they also told us a story about Prince Michael of Kent too libelous to repeat here so I let them off.
With days of planning Could there have been better effort to get some multi-linguists down there to communicate the plan?
All that the crisis has done so far is push the Tories to abandon their individualism and pick all the fruit from the long sought money tree.
Neither LibDems nor Labour is really rising to the challenge of mapping out their visions for a better world for afterwards. Maybe now isn’t the time to be promoting it, but it is certainly the time to be thinking about it.
We absolutely never will rejoin the customs union. Instead we will create A customs union like Turkey did.
Or are you falsely comparing with borders outside the Common Transit Convention?
And besides actually Hunt knows the NHS inside out and is the best man for the job.of those available.
In particular talks are getting advanced with a fair few countries in liberating trade restrictions on Services like Finance etc that are our key exports and something the EU has not prioritised in its agreements.
https://www.tes.com/news/coronavirus-gavin-williamson-probed-schools-dont-drive-covid-claim
Presumably so he can keep them open.
Interesting to note though that at the bottom of the article the egregious Ladhani is rowing back on his previous claims and now stating the causal link is not yet established.
You seem to be contrasting our arrangements with non-CTC nations which is a bit of a schoolboy error.
So I totally got what she was saying. Its not people who are monsters. It is ordinary people stuck in a time that has happily receded into the past. I don't think it is right to try and apply 2020 morality onto people from previous generations, but I do try to help educate my dad (gently) by pointing out that they can't say things like that any more.
It is a real problem for Labour - people who feel the world they are comfortable in having slipped away from them. Its also a problem for the Tories pandering to their prejudices...