What's their objection to the replacement scheme, which will cost less?
Its not as good? Replacing a 2-way scheme that allows exchange students with a 1-way scheme where no-one comes to Scotland. Remember that unlike in England, Scotland actively encourages migration...
Exactly so.
So we must have a higher % of migrants up here in Scotland then right?
Oh no, that's right, it's actually sparsely populated and overwhelmingly white here, allowing people to wave '#Refugeeswelcome' signs whilst having not a shred of experience of actual migration.
Too much obsessing about fish I suspect. Boris let the major issues pass him by.
Would a 'deal' on financial services have helped the City if through the 'level playing field' the EU could have brought in various regulations and taxes?
Whilst some might argue for a transaction tax, having one applied via this route might not have not gone down well...
We hear this is a possibility every election. If there was ever going to be such a PA, it would have been the last GE, where they could have stopped Brexit, give 16 year olds the vote and introduce PR.
Agree, although I think like 1997 there is a slim possibility Labour doesn't bother to campaign in certain seats and vice versa for LDs?
To get to PR, Labour have to believe they will never, ever win a UK General Election under FPTP again.
I probably do believe that, but I bet most Labour Party members don't.
Labour's position in England in 2019 was not far off its 1992 performance - though the distribution of its support was very different. Moreover, Labour won a majority of seats there in 2005 despite only enjoying a 3% lead across GB - with the Tories ahead in popular vote terms. Last week Yougov had Labour 4% ahead in GB.
2005 was however based on winning a number of smaller seats in the North of England on low turnouts.
Quite a lot of them are no longer in the red column...
Indeed - but Labour can expect to win back many of those seats whilst also being stronger in the South - eg Canterbury, Putney and Enfield Southgate were Tory - held in 2005.
Really? What makes you think they will win those seats back?
Some of the seats lost were not 'Red Wall' seats anyway . I would include both Bury seats here - both of which had bigger Tory majorities in 1992 than in 2019. Beyond that many of the seats lost - Leigh, Burnley , Durham NW, Workington. etc - are highly unlikely to remain Tory other than in elections with a big popular vote lead.Grimsby voters may not be too impressed with the Fish Deal either.
I really think you are being optimistic about Labour’s prospects. Demographics in those seats are not on their side, and have been drifting against them for years. They are increasingly occupied by the semi-affluent retired that are the bedrock of Tory support, while the remaining working age poor simply don’t bother to vote in large numbers.
Far from Durham North West being recaptured (for instance) I can foresee Wansbeck falling. Mansfield is a warning here. Narrowly captured in 2017 by a controversial and ineffectual Tory MP, held in 2019 with a majority of more than 16,000.
At the same time, I do agree that they will be more competitive in many southern seats. I can see Worcester coming into play, for example. Whether the two effects will cancel each other out is another question.
But in the context of an election which has the parties close to neck and neck in vote share it is difficult to see those seats remaining Tory.The two major issues which appeared to drive voters - Corbyn and Brexit - will no longer be relevant and much of the swing they generated is likely to be reversed.The Bury seats have not moved demographically against Labour - indeed the party dod well to come so close to holding them.Halifax was Tory 1983 - 87 and 1955 - 64 yet stayed Labour in 2019.Seats such as Colne Valley and Darlington are also likely Labour gains.
No, it really isn’t difficult to see them staying Tory. As I have said, demographics are not Labour’s friend in those seats. Even in 2010 and 2015, there were signs that they were gradually leaking away from Labour (Morley and Outwood being the most notable).
I think an element of normalcy bias is coming into play here. Because they have often (always) been Labour, they will go back.
Just to add a parallel, I would point out until 1945 Bootle was a Tory seat, and had with brief exceptions been considered a safe Tory seat. Since 1945 no Labour candidate has got less than 50% of the vote there and more usually they’ve exceeded 60%.
It's another manifestation of the insane age profile in the last two general elections. And the fact that some post industrial towns have essentially become places where people retire, because the towns can't sustain jobs. Too small, too remote.
However, it does mean the Conservatives have to run pretty fast to stand still. Not impossible, but not a trivial problem, either.
It also creates a tricky problem for the Conservative Levelling Up Agenda. There is an answer, involving cyber hubs for remote working. It would be a sensible use of the experience built up in 2020. But an influx of young knowledge workers to (say) Dewsbury and the nice surrounding towns wouldn't be good news for its new Conservative MP. What's an ambitious scamp to do?
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
Remember all things being equal the May locals will consist of elections which were last contested in 2016 when the Tories did meh, and 2017 where the Tories absolutely smashed it and Labour were beaten like morning wood.
So the council results should be bad for the government, they usually are for parties that have been in power for eleven years.
You and @kle4 are the centre-right folks I have the most respect for here, both credits to the site and I always find we have a lot in common despite our other disagreements. I trust your opinions above most.
What's their objection to the replacement scheme, which will cost less?
Its not as good? Replacing a 2-way scheme that allows exchange students with a 1-way scheme where no-one comes to Scotland. Remember that unlike in England, Scotland actively encourages migration...
Exactly so.
So we must have a higher % of migrants up here in Scotland then right?
Oh no, that's right, it's actually sparsely populated and overwhelmingly white here, allowing people to wave '#Refugeeswelcome' signs whilst having not a shred of experience of actual migration.
Hard demographics.
Is that Nichola's retort when someone asks her if they can place a refugee family in her home?
We hear this is a possibility every election. If there was ever going to be such a PA, it would have been the last GE, where they could have stopped Brexit, give 16 year olds the vote and introduce PR.
Agree, although I think like 1997 there is a slim possibility Labour doesn't bother to campaign in certain seats and vice versa for LDs?
To get to PR, Labour have to believe they will never, ever win a UK General Election under FPTP again.
I probably do believe that, but I bet most Labour Party members don't.
Labour's position in England in 2019 was not far off its 1992 performance - though the distribution of its support was very different. Moreover, Labour won a majority of seats there in 2005 despite only enjoying a 3% lead across GB - with the Tories ahead in popular vote terms. Last week Yougov had Labour 4% ahead in GB.
2005 was however based on winning a number of smaller seats in the North of England on low turnouts.
Quite a lot of them are no longer in the red column...
Indeed - but Labour can expect to win back many of those seats whilst also being stronger in the South - eg Canterbury, Putney and Enfield Southgate were Tory - held in 2005.
Really? What makes you think they will win those seats back?
Some of the seats lost were not 'Red Wall' seats anyway . I would include both Bury seats here - both of which had bigger Tory majorities in 1992 than in 2019. Beyond that many of the seats lost - Leigh, Burnley , Durham NW, Workington. etc - are highly unlikely to remain Tory other than in elections with a big popular vote lead.Grimsby voters may not be too impressed with the Fish Deal either.
I really think you are being optimistic about Labour’s prospects. Demographics in those seats are not on their side, and have been drifting against them for years. They are increasingly occupied by the semi-affluent retired that are the bedrock of Tory support, while the remaining working age poor simply don’t bother to vote in large numbers.
Far from Durham North West being recaptured (for instance) I can foresee Wansbeck falling. Mansfield is a warning here. Narrowly captured in 2017 by a controversial and ineffectual Tory MP, held in 2019 with a majority of more than 16,000.
At the same time, I do agree that they will be more competitive in many southern seats. I can see Worcester coming into play, for example. Whether the two effects will cancel each other out is another question.
But in the context of an election which has the parties close to neck and neck in vote share it is difficult to see those seats remaining Tory.The two major issues which appeared to drive voters - Corbyn and Brexit - will no longer be relevant and much of the swing they generated is likely to be reversed.The Bury seats have not moved demographically against Labour - indeed the party dod well to come so close to holding them.Halifax was Tory 1983 - 87 and 1955 - 64 yet stayed Labour in 2019.Seats such as Colne Valley and Darlington are also likely Labour gains.
No, it really isn’t difficult to see them staying Tory. As I have said, demographics are not Labour’s friend in those seats. Even in 2010 and 2015, there were signs that they were gradually leaking away from Labour (Morley and Outwood being the most notable).
I think an element of normalcy bias is coming into play here. Because they have often (always) been Labour, they will go back.
Just to add a parallel, I would point out until 1945 Bootle was a Tory seat, and had with brief exceptions been considered a safe Tory seat. Since 1945 no Labour candidate has got less than 50% of the vote there and more usually they’ve exceeded 60%.
The seats of Liverpool Walton - West Derby - and Toxteth were Tory until 1964 - yet clearly hold no prospects for them nowadays. Of course demographics change , and there has been a longterm underlying shift against Labour in some of those former citadels. Despite that , in anything other than a near Tory landslide year those seats are very likely to be Labour again - albeit by smaller majorities than in recent decades. It is a bit akin to 1997 in reverse when Labour took seats such as Romford , Upminster and Newark - but which returned to Tory hands even on the casis of a modest recovery. Welwyn & Hatfield, Hemel Hempstead and St Albans being other examples.
We hear this is a possibility every election. If there was ever going to be such a PA, it would have been the last GE, where they could have stopped Brexit, give 16 year olds the vote and introduce PR.
Agree, although I think like 1997 there is a slim possibility Labour doesn't bother to campaign in certain seats and vice versa for LDs?
To get to PR, Labour have to believe they will never, ever win a UK General Election under FPTP again.
I probably do believe that, but I bet most Labour Party members don't.
Labour's position in England in 2019 was not far off its 1992 performance - though the distribution of its support was very different. Moreover, Labour won a majority of seats there in 2005 despite only enjoying a 3% lead across GB - with the Tories ahead in popular vote terms. Last week Yougov had Labour 4% ahead in GB.
2005 was however based on winning a number of smaller seats in the North of England on low turnouts.
Quite a lot of them are no longer in the red column...
Indeed - but Labour can expect to win back many of those seats whilst also being stronger in the South - eg Canterbury, Putney and Enfield Southgate were Tory - held in 2005.
Really? What makes you think they will win those seats back?
Some of the seats lost were not 'Red Wall' seats anyway . I would include both Bury seats here - both of which had bigger Tory majorities in 1992 than in 2019. Beyond that many of the seats lost - Leigh, Burnley , Durham NW, Workington. etc - are highly unlikely to remain Tory other than in elections with a big popular vote lead.Grimsby voters may not be too impressed with the Fish Deal either.
I really think you are being optimistic about Labour’s prospects. Demographics in those seats are not on their side, and have been drifting against them for years. They are increasingly occupied by the semi-affluent retired that are the bedrock of Tory support, while the remaining working age poor simply don’t bother to vote in large numbers.
Far from Durham North West being recaptured (for instance) I can foresee Wansbeck falling. Mansfield is a warning here. Narrowly captured in 2017 by a controversial and ineffectual Tory MP, held in 2019 with a majority of more than 16,000.
At the same time, I do agree that they will be more competitive in many southern seats. I can see Worcester coming into play, for example. Whether the two effects will cancel each other out is another question.
But in the context of an election which has the parties close to neck and neck in vote share it is difficult to see those seats remaining Tory.The two major issues which appeared to drive voters - Corbyn and Brexit - will no longer be relevant and much of the swing they generated is likely to be reversed.The Bury seats have not moved demographically against Labour - indeed the party dod well to come so close to holding them.Halifax was Tory 1983 - 87 and 1955 - 64 yet stayed Labour in 2019.Seats such as Colne Valley and Darlington are also likely Labour gains.
Pidcock got 52% of the vote in 2017 in Durham NW so the demographics haven't shifted that much against Labour. That was higher than the 87 election in the aftermath of the Miners strike.
On the other hand, Labour's GB vote share in 1987 was only 31.8% - whereas in 2019 it reached 41%.
We hear this is a possibility every election. If there was ever going to be such a PA, it would have been the last GE, where they could have stopped Brexit, give 16 year olds the vote and introduce PR.
Agree, although I think like 1997 there is a slim possibility Labour doesn't bother to campaign in certain seats and vice versa for LDs?
To get to PR, Labour have to believe they will never, ever win a UK General Election under FPTP again.
I probably do believe that, but I bet most Labour Party members don't.
Labour's position in England in 2019 was not far off its 1992 performance - though the distribution of its support was very different. Moreover, Labour won a majority of seats there in 2005 despite only enjoying a 3% lead across GB - with the Tories ahead in popular vote terms. Last week Yougov had Labour 4% ahead in GB.
2005 was however based on winning a number of smaller seats in the North of England on low turnouts.
Quite a lot of them are no longer in the red column...
Indeed - but Labour can expect to win back many of those seats whilst also being stronger in the South - eg Canterbury, Putney and Enfield Southgate were Tory - held in 2005.
Really? What makes you think they will win those seats back?
Some of the seats lost were not 'Red Wall' seats anyway . I would include both Bury seats here - both of which had bigger Tory majorities in 1992 than in 2019. Beyond that many of the seats lost - Leigh, Burnley , Durham NW, Workington. etc - are highly unlikely to remain Tory other than in elections with a big popular vote lead.Grimsby voters may not be too impressed with the Fish Deal either.
I really think you are being optimistic about Labour’s prospects. Demographics in those seats are not on their side, and have been drifting against them for years. They are increasingly occupied by the semi-affluent retired that are the bedrock of Tory support, while the remaining working age poor simply don’t bother to vote in large numbers.
Far from Durham North West being recaptured (for instance) I can foresee Wansbeck falling. Mansfield is a warning here. Narrowly captured in 2017 by a controversial and ineffectual Tory MP, held in 2019 with a majority of more than 16,000.
At the same time, I do agree that they will be more competitive in many southern seats. I can see Worcester coming into play, for example. Whether the two effects will cancel each other out is another question.
But in the context of an election which has the parties close to neck and neck in vote share it is difficult to see those seats remaining Tory.The two major issues which appeared to drive voters - Corbyn and Brexit - will no longer be relevant and much of the swing they generated is likely to be reversed.The Bury seats have not moved demographically against Labour - indeed the party dod well to come so close to holding them.Halifax was Tory 1983 - 87 and 1955 - 64 yet stayed Labour in 2019.Seats such as Colne Valley and Darlington are also likely Labour gains.
Pidcock got 52% of the vote in 2017 in Durham NW so the demographics haven't shifted that much against Labour. That was higher than the 87 election in the aftermath of the Miners strike.
On the other hand, Labour's GB vote share in 1987 was only 31.8% - whereas in 2019 it reached 41%.
We hear this is a possibility every election. If there was ever going to be such a PA, it would have been the last GE, where they could have stopped Brexit, give 16 year olds the vote and introduce PR.
Agree, although I think like 1997 there is a slim possibility Labour doesn't bother to campaign in certain seats and vice versa for LDs?
To get to PR, Labour have to believe they will never, ever win a UK General Election under FPTP again.
I probably do believe that, but I bet most Labour Party members don't.
Labour's position in England in 2019 was not far off its 1992 performance - though the distribution of its support was very different. Moreover, Labour won a majority of seats there in 2005 despite only enjoying a 3% lead across GB - with the Tories ahead in popular vote terms. Last week Yougov had Labour 4% ahead in GB.
2005 was however based on winning a number of smaller seats in the North of England on low turnouts.
Quite a lot of them are no longer in the red column...
Indeed - but Labour can expect to win back many of those seats whilst also being stronger in the South - eg Canterbury, Putney and Enfield Southgate were Tory - held in 2005.
Really? What makes you think they will win those seats back?
Some of the seats lost were not 'Red Wall' seats anyway . I would include both Bury seats here - both of which had bigger Tory majorities in 1992 than in 2019. Beyond that many of the seats lost - Leigh, Burnley , Durham NW, Workington. etc - are highly unlikely to remain Tory other than in elections with a big popular vote lead.Grimsby voters may not be too impressed with the Fish Deal either.
I really think you are being optimistic about Labour’s prospects. Demographics in those seats are not on their side, and have been drifting against them for years. They are increasingly occupied by the semi-affluent retired that are the bedrock of Tory support, while the remaining working age poor simply don’t bother to vote in large numbers.
Far from Durham North West being recaptured (for instance) I can foresee Wansbeck falling. Mansfield is a warning here. Narrowly captured in 2017 by a controversial and ineffectual Tory MP, held in 2019 with a majority of more than 16,000.
At the same time, I do agree that they will be more competitive in many southern seats. I can see Worcester coming into play, for example. Whether the two effects will cancel each other out is another question.
But in the context of an election which has the parties close to neck and neck in vote share it is difficult to see those seats remaining Tory.The two major issues which appeared to drive voters - Corbyn and Brexit - will no longer be relevant and much of the swing they generated is likely to be reversed.The Bury seats have not moved demographically against Labour - indeed the party dod well to come so close to holding them.Halifax was Tory 1983 - 87 and 1955 - 64 yet stayed Labour in 2019.Seats such as Colne Valley and Darlington are also likely Labour gains.
Pidcock got 52% of the vote in 2017 in Durham NW so the demographics haven't shifted that much against Labour. That was higher than the 87 election in the aftermath of the Miners strike.
On the other hand, Labour's GB vote share in 1987 was only 31.8% - whereas in 2019 it reached 41%.
"Hospitals have been ordered to free up every possible bed for the growing number of Covid patients amid fears of a high death toll from the disease in January.
NHS England warned that the entire health service will have to stay on its highest state of alert until at least the end of March because of the ongoing influx of very sick patients, exacerbated by the new strain of coronavirus.
...
In a vivid illustration of the pressures hospitals are facing, London’s Royal Free hospital – which is receiving about 12 new Covid inpatients every day – has cancelled all non-emergency surgery until mid-February and restricted staff holidays.
It has become “overwhelmed”, one doctor there said. “Every staff group, from porters to surgeons, have had their leave cancelled from 21 December. Only a maximum of a five-day-run, including bank holidays, is permitted from now on. Essentially cancelled the staff Christmas holidays. They have also cancelled all non-emergency surgery again until the middle of February. So the hospital is not coping really. The 12 Covid admissions a day has quickly overwhelmed the place,” they said.
...
Dr Sonia Adesara, a doctor in London, tweeted: “My hospital has currently no ITU beds. No spare CPAP (non-invasive ventilation) capacity. Spent the past 12 hours caring for people in their 50s, 60s, 70s who are on the highest oxygen we can give. Trying to keep them breathing until we can free up capacity.”
Things are very grim and going to get worse.
This sounds really bad.
It’s not like everything was rosy and the staff were all rested and contented before this surge.
One other factor we may need to consider even after this pandemic is brought under control is how many NHS staff will need prolonged respite to get back to full energy.
From the beginning my Trust has realised this, and asked us to keep to our leave as far as possible to prevent burnout. We have a shadow rota for back up if anyone calls in sick or self isolating, but otherwise leave is respected.
I’m glad to hear it, but how typical is that?
No idea, but the strain is telling on our Respiratory medicine dept. Literally half the nurses are absent at present, at a time where we have 25% more admissions than the first wave.
Grim. My sympathies.
This, surely, is why AstraZen are hurrying their jab to market.
Supercovid is a bitch, and this new vaccine is maybe the only way give her a slap.
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
"Hospitals have been ordered to free up every possible bed for the growing number of Covid patients amid fears of a high death toll from the disease in January.
NHS England warned that the entire health service will have to stay on its highest state of alert until at least the end of March because of the ongoing influx of very sick patients, exacerbated by the new strain of coronavirus.
...
In a vivid illustration of the pressures hospitals are facing, London’s Royal Free hospital – which is receiving about 12 new Covid inpatients every day – has cancelled all non-emergency surgery until mid-February and restricted staff holidays.
It has become “overwhelmed”, one doctor there said. “Every staff group, from porters to surgeons, have had their leave cancelled from 21 December. Only a maximum of a five-day-run, including bank holidays, is permitted from now on. Essentially cancelled the staff Christmas holidays. They have also cancelled all non-emergency surgery again until the middle of February. So the hospital is not coping really. The 12 Covid admissions a day has quickly overwhelmed the place,” they said.
...
Dr Sonia Adesara, a doctor in London, tweeted: “My hospital has currently no ITU beds. No spare CPAP (non-invasive ventilation) capacity. Spent the past 12 hours caring for people in their 50s, 60s, 70s who are on the highest oxygen we can give. Trying to keep them breathing until we can free up capacity.”
Things are very grim and going to get worse.
This sounds really bad.
It’s not like everything was rosy and the staff were all rested and contented before this surge.
One other factor we may need to consider even after this pandemic is brought under control is how many NHS staff will need prolonged respite to get back to full energy.
From what I hear from some who work in hospitals, I think we may see some genuine and ongoing traumatic reactions. There's only so long that we can push people to their limit. One of my relatives, a nurse, has collapsed and I'm not sure she will ever recover. I think she's certain to leave the profession. This won't be an isolated case.
As I've been saying, I don't think the vaccine will ease hospital pressure fast enough, even if it reduces the death toll in a month or so. I am quite concerned about what happens then.
What's their objection to the replacement scheme, which will cost less?
Its not as good? Replacing a 2-way scheme that allows exchange students with a 1-way scheme where no-one comes to Scotland. Remember that unlike in England, Scotland actively encourages migration...
Exactly so.
So we must have a higher % of migrants up here in Scotland then right?
Oh no, that's right, it's actually sparsely populated and overwhelmingly white here, allowing people to wave '#Refugeeswelcome' signs whilst having not a shred of experience of actual migration.
What's their objection to the replacement scheme, which will cost less?
Its not as good? Replacing a 2-way scheme that allows exchange students with a 1-way scheme where no-one comes to Scotland. Remember that unlike in England, Scotland actively encourages migration...
Exactly so.
So we must have a higher % of migrants up here in Scotland then right?
Oh no, that's right, it's actually sparsely populated and overwhelmingly white here, allowing people to wave '#Refugeeswelcome' signs whilst having not a shred of experience of actual migration.
If only Scotland had to suffer the darkies the same as England they would learn the reality of it?
That article looks quite damaging. If the situation wasn't so critical I'd expect the authorities to tell them to go away and do it again, properly this time.
I think we have to wait for the regulators’ decision. It’s fairly likely that (the measuring blunder apart) the science was a great deal better than Oxford/AZN’s communication, which has been piss poor (not unusual for big pharma).
The measuring blunder was only one of several odd bits to the Cov002 trial. The age range changed, and it is odd that the period to 2nd injection was median 84 days. It's almost as if it was intended as a single dose trial, and then they changed their mind. Changing the placebo to saline from meningococcal vaccine part way too. If one were to base a decision on dosage regime on the HD/FD regime, then the gap should be nearly 3 months too.
If the situation weren't so desperate we would never approve based on this paper.
Quite. Contrary to the triumphalism coming from some politicians (and certain University personages), I'm embarrassed by the Oxford trial. The vaccine may be okay, but the science of the trial was far from world-leading...
(The Reuters article make some comments suggesting various conflicts of interest. I think they are probably largely off-base, but we should look again at scientists running studies into medication where they personally may profit from a certain outcome. It's not a good look, no matter how carefully managed.)
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
The only swing seat local to me is Loughborough. I could imagine a Labour gain there but it won't be easy. It is the sort of seat that Labour need to gain to form a government though.
The other seat is NW Leics but that has changed substantially from when Labour last took it in 1997. I cannot see that happening again. It has gone down the rabbit hole. The complete dipstick Andrew Bridgen has a 20 000 majority there now.
What's their objection to the replacement scheme, which will cost less?
Its not as good? Replacing a 2-way scheme that allows exchange students with a 1-way scheme where no-one comes to Scotland. Remember that unlike in England, Scotland actively encourages migration...
Exactly so.
So we must have a higher % of migrants up here in Scotland then right?
Oh no, that's right, it's actually sparsely populated and overwhelmingly white here, allowing people to wave '#Refugeeswelcome' signs whilst having not a shred of experience of actual migration.
If only Scotland had to suffer the darkies the same as England they would learn the reality of it?
Also, it's often the seats in England with the least immigration which have been ferociously pro-Brexit. Which certainly suggests a distinct difference in philosophy.
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
The only swing seat local to me is Loughborough. I could imagine a Labour gain there but it won't be easy. It is the sort of seat that Labour need to gain to form a government though.
The other seat is NW Leics but that has changed substantially from when Labour last took it in 1997. I cannot see that happening again. It has gone down the rabbit hole. The complete dipstick Andrew Bridgen has a 20 000 majority there now.
The lesson is that people like dipsticks! We always get the correct result in elections...
"Hospitals have been ordered to free up every possible bed for the growing number of Covid patients amid fears of a high death toll from the disease in January.
NHS England warned that the entire health service will have to stay on its highest state of alert until at least the end of March because of the ongoing influx of very sick patients, exacerbated by the new strain of coronavirus.
...
In a vivid illustration of the pressures hospitals are facing, London’s Royal Free hospital – which is receiving about 12 new Covid inpatients every day – has cancelled all non-emergency surgery until mid-February and restricted staff holidays.
It has become “overwhelmed”, one doctor there said. “Every staff group, from porters to surgeons, have had their leave cancelled from 21 December. Only a maximum of a five-day-run, including bank holidays, is permitted from now on. Essentially cancelled the staff Christmas holidays. They have also cancelled all non-emergency surgery again until the middle of February. So the hospital is not coping really. The 12 Covid admissions a day has quickly overwhelmed the place,” they said.
...
Dr Sonia Adesara, a doctor in London, tweeted: “My hospital has currently no ITU beds. No spare CPAP (non-invasive ventilation) capacity. Spent the past 12 hours caring for people in their 50s, 60s, 70s who are on the highest oxygen we can give. Trying to keep them breathing until we can free up capacity.”
Things are very grim and going to get worse.
This sounds really bad.
It’s not like everything was rosy and the staff were all rested and contented before this surge.
One other factor we may need to consider even after this pandemic is brought under control is how many NHS staff will need prolonged respite to get back to full energy.
From what I hear from some who work in hospitals, I think we may see some genuine and ongoing traumatic reactions. There's only so long that we can push people to their limit. One of my relatives, a nurse, has collapsed and I'm not sure she will ever recover. I think she's certain to leave the profession. This won't be an isolated case.
As I've been saying, I don't think the vaccine will ease hospital pressure fast enough, even if it reduces the death toll in a month or so. I am quite concerned about what happens then.
--AS
Yes, one of our staff, a normally robust 30 year old Spanish nurse was redeployed to covid ICU and had 3 of her patients die on her first shift. It is tough for ICU regulars, but for redeployed very scary indeed, as they are working outside their usual skillset.
She went off to Spain for Christmas, a day ahead of Tier 4 starting. She needed some time with family before coming back. She is our sole Iberian nurse remaining from the group of over 30 who joined in 2015. The rest have all gone.
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
What would you like to see Labour offering?
As I've said before, we need to focus on bread and butter issues and have policies that will make a material difference to people's lives. And forget about the woke stuff that means nothing to the vast majority of people in the seats we need to win.
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
What would you like to see Labour offering?
As I've said before, we need to focus on bread and butter issues and have policies that will make a material difference to people's lives. And forget about the woke stuff that means nothing to the vast majority of people in the seats we need to win.
I think law and order funding is a good place to start
"If history teaches us anything, it is that this country’s mixture of cap-doffing and unassailable privilege tends to keep even the most rotten hierarchies in place, and the saga grinds on. This is the essence of the very British mess that we seem unable to escape."
I would only add, of course, that Scotland may well be able to escape.
What's their objection to the replacement scheme, which will cost less?
Its not as good? Replacing a 2-way scheme that allows exchange students with a 1-way scheme where no-one comes to Scotland. Remember that unlike in England, Scotland actively encourages migration...
Exactly so.
So we must have a higher % of migrants up here in Scotland then right?
Oh no, that's right, it's actually sparsely populated and overwhelmingly white here, allowing people to wave '#Refugeeswelcome' signs whilst having not a shred of experience of actual migration.
If only Scotland had to suffer the darkies the same as England they would learn the reality of it?
Also, it's often the seats in England with the least immigration which have been ferociously pro-Brexit. Which certainly suggests a distinct difference in philosophy.
Indeed the English and Welsh seats with declining populations were particularly Brexity in 2016. It is almost as if economic decline mattered more than immigration.
What's their objection to the replacement scheme, which will cost less?
Its not as good? Replacing a 2-way scheme that allows exchange students with a 1-way scheme where no-one comes to Scotland. Remember that unlike in England, Scotland actively encourages migration...
Exactly so.
So we must have a higher % of migrants up here in Scotland then right?
Oh no, that's right, it's actually sparsely populated and overwhelmingly white here, allowing people to wave '#Refugeeswelcome' signs whilst having not a shred of experience of actual migration.
If only Scotland had to suffer the darkies the same as England they would learn the reality of it?
Also, it's often the seats in England with the least immigration which have been ferociously pro-Brexit. Which certainly suggests a distinct difference in philosophy.
Indeed the English and Welsh seats with declining populations were particularly Brexity in 2016. It is almost as if economic decline mattered more than immigration.
That I can believe - but it is difficult to reconcile with the reasons often given.
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
Wonder why not Monday....also slightly concerning this is all leaking. So far they have done their work and announcement come with zero knowledge beforehand.
Bank holiday... plus not starting until jan 4th so no hurry...
The regulator should be looking at share trading in pharma stocks in the last few days.
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
What would you like to see Labour offering?
As I've said before, we need to focus on bread and butter issues and have policies that will make a material difference to people's lives. And forget about the woke stuff that means nothing to the vast majority of people in the seats we need to win.
I think law and order funding is a good place to start
For sure. Cut crime. Catch the scrotes. Lock the feckers up. No bloody hand-wringing wibble about the criminals being society's victims. Priti in a red rosette.
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
What would you like to see Labour offering?
As I've said before, we need to focus on bread and butter issues and have policies that will make a material difference to people's lives. And forget about the woke stuff that means nothing to the vast majority of people in the seats we need to win.
I think law and order funding is a good place to start
For sure. Cut crime. Catch the scrotes. Lock the feckers up. No bloody hand-wringing wibble about the criminals being society's victims. Priti in a red rosette.
I think the new Shadow Home Sec is decent for that, sadly it's Dodds who is the weak link
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
Er, when they tried to get a YES vote in 2014, the SNP were explicitly and openly hoping for a vote which would automatically eject Scotland from the EU.
The SNP doesn't give a shit about the EU. Whatever gets them to indy is all that matters, and they now see being pro-EU, when before they were happy to leave the EU, as beneficial to the indy cause.
"If history teaches us anything, it is that this country’s mixture of cap-doffing and unassailable privilege tends to keep even the most rotten hierarchies in place, and the saga grinds on. This is the essence of the very British mess that we seem unable to escape."
I would only add, of course, that Scotland may well be able to escape.
I get very wary of any analysis that hinges upon a vision of the country as implacably locked in some cap doffing culture and the like. Like a lot of things where the answer is class issues, it seems like people are acting the hammer looking for a nail.
Too much obsessing about fish I suspect. Boris let the major issues pass him by.
Would a 'deal' on financial services have helped the City if through the 'level playing field' the EU could have brought in various regulations and taxes?
Whilst some might argue for a transaction tax, having one applied via this route might not have not gone down well...
It is, of course, worth remembering that the only FTT in Europe is levied in... oh yes... the UK.
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
I don't know why they are framing it that way. Seems like it would be easy enough to vote against a deal, noting that there is no danger of no deal, and so there is no need for them to even implicitly support this consequence of the Brexit project. Rather than pretend through linguistic trickery that the alternative to this specific issue is EU membership.
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
What would you like to see Labour offering?
As I've said before, we need to focus on bread and butter issues and have policies that will make a material difference to people's lives. And forget about the woke stuff that means nothing to the vast majority of people in the seats we need to win.
I think law and order funding is a good place to start
For sure. Cut crime. Catch the scrotes. Lock the feckers up. No bloody hand-wringing wibble about the criminals being society's victims. Priti in a red rosette.
Currently it is taking 3 years to get cases to trial. 3 years. In some cases longer. The "scrotes" have been caught and charged. But it will take years before they are tried. And the longer the wait the greater the chance of a Not Guilty verdict. Plus the pain and stress for victims and witnesses as well as for people who are, unfashionable as it is to say it, innocent until proven guilty.
Why? Because the government has repeatedly cut investment in the judicial system. It has cut funding. It has closed courts. It has sold them off. It has cut the sitting hours of judges. It has cut legal aid so trials take longer as defendants try to defend themselves.
So if you don't like this and think that Red Wall voters would like to have a criminal justice system that works, you should be asking for these cuts to be reversed. But I bet all those moaning about this will not do that. They get what they pay for. And they are currently paying for a 3rd world justice system. And that is what they are getting. No amount of speeches about being tough on criminals - whether it comes from Priti or anyone else - is going to change this until the government puts our money where its mouth is.
OK, that is pretty cringy even from the Telegraph, even if I'd hope it was tongue in cheek to upset 'the right people'.
And as a royalist, I don't kneel before the genetic line we have, they merely happen to be the ones in place. Essentially any monarch will do under the system, the country essentially said as much 300 years ago when it set a bunch of succession rules.
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
But Shipley is a traditional Tory seat which only falls to Labour in landslide years like 1997 when Marcus Fox was defeated. Labour also held on in 2001 before losing narrowly in 2005.
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
I don't know why they are framing it that way. Seems like it would be easy enough to vote against a deal, noting that there is no danger of no deal, and so there is no need for them to even implicitly support this consequence of the Brexit project. Rather than pretend through linguistic trickery that the alternative to this specific issue is EU membership.
It doesn't matter that we left the EU nearly a year ago - too many Brexiteers insisted that the last 11 months were the battle for Brexit. As they own the agenda that became the narrative. So why not exploit this stupidity? We leave the EU with this deal - so sayeth the people who want to leave. So attack the deal. Its a free hit.
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
What would you like to see Labour offering?
As I've said before, we need to focus on bread and butter issues and have policies that will make a material difference to people's lives. And forget about the woke stuff that means nothing to the vast majority of people in the seats we need to win.
I think law and order funding is a good place to start
For sure. Cut crime. Catch the scrotes. Lock the feckers up. No bloody hand-wringing wibble about the criminals being society's victims. Priti in a red rosette.
Currently it is taking 3 years to get cases to trial. 3 years. In some cases longer. The "scrotes" have been caught and charged. But it will take years before they are tried. And the longer the wait the greater the chance of a Not Guilty verdict. Plus the pain and stress for victims and witnesses as well as for people who are, unfashionable as it is to say it, innocent until proven guilty.
Why? Because the government has repeatedly cut investment in the judicial system. It has cut funding. It has closed courts. It has sold them off. It has cut the sitting hours of judges. It has cut legal aid so trials take longer as defendants try to defend themselves.
So if you don't like this and think that Red Wall voters would like to have a criminal justice system that works, you should be asking for these cuts to be reversed. But I bet all those moaning about this will not do that. They get what they pay for. And they are currently paying for a 3rd world justice system. And that is what they are getting. No amount of speeches about being tough on criminals - whether it comes from Priti or anyone else - is going to change this until the government puts our money where its mouth is.
Yes, I don't really remember anyone in my adult life promising to be soft on crime, I don't see why they cannot keep the stern rhetoric and also put in effort on the systemic problems. Yes, I know there are easy stories about costs of things, but it doesn't seem hard to make it a vote winner to promise to be tough, and to spend enough to make justice speedier etc.
I mean 'build more prisons' seems to be vote winner, so why not 'build more courts, hire more judges' and so on?
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
The only swing seat local to me is Loughborough. I could imagine a Labour gain there but it won't be easy. It is the sort of seat that Labour need to gain to form a government though.
The other seat is NW Leics but that has changed substantially from when Labour last took it in 1997. I cannot see that happening again. It has gone down the rabbit hole. The complete dipstick Andrew Bridgen has a 20 000 majority there now.
For many years the Labour MP for Loughborough was the surgeon - John Cronin.
OK, that is pretty cringy even from the Telegraph, even if I'd hope it was tongue in cheek to upset 'the right people'.
And as a royalist, I don't kneel before the genetic line we have, they merely happen to be the ones in place. Essentially any monarch will do under the system, the country essentially said as much 300 years ago when it set a bunch of succession rules.
Isn’t owning the libs a bit passé?
Slight shocked that you'd accept, say, Andrew as your monarch on a point of principle.
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
What would you like to see Labour offering?
As I've said before, we need to focus on bread and butter issues and have policies that will make a material difference to people's lives. And forget about the woke stuff that means nothing to the vast majority of people in the seats we need to win.
I think law and order funding is a good place to start
For sure. Cut crime. Catch the scrotes. Lock the feckers up. No bloody hand-wringing wibble about the criminals being society's victims. Priti in a red rosette.
Currently it is taking 3 years to get cases to trial. 3 years. In some cases longer. The "scrotes" have been caught and charged. But it will take years before they are tried. And the longer the wait the greater the chance of a Not Guilty verdict. Plus the pain and stress for victims and witnesses as well as for people who are, unfashionable as it is to say it, innocent until proven guilty.
Why? Because the government has repeatedly cut investment in the judicial system. It has cut funding. It has closed courts. It has sold them off. It has cut the sitting hours of judges. It has cut legal aid so trials take longer as defendants try to defend themselves.
So if you don't like this and think that Red Wall voters would like to have a criminal justice system that works, you should be asking for these cuts to be reversed. But I bet all those moaning about this will not do that. They get what they pay for. And they are currently paying for a 3rd world justice system. And that is what they are getting. No amount of speeches about being tough on criminals - whether it comes from Priti or anyone else - is going to change this until the government puts our money where its mouth is.
Yes, I don't really remember anyone in my adult life promising to be soft on crime, I don't see why they cannot keep the stern rhetoric and also put in effort on the systemic problems. Yes, I know there are easy stories about costs of things, but it doesn't seem hard to make it a vote winner to promise to be tough, and to spend enough to make justice speedier etc.
I mean 'build more prisons' seems to be vote winner, so why not 'build more courts, hire more judges' and so on?
What's their objection to the replacement scheme, which will cost less?
Its not as good? Replacing a 2-way scheme that allows exchange students with a 1-way scheme where no-one comes to Scotland. Remember that unlike in England, Scotland actively encourages migration...
Exactly so.
So we must have a higher % of migrants up here in Scotland then right?
Oh no, that's right, it's actually sparsely populated and overwhelmingly white here, allowing people to wave '#Refugeeswelcome' signs whilst having not a shred of experience of actual migration.
If only Scotland had to suffer the darkies the same as England they would learn the reality of it?
Also, it's often the seats in England with the least immigration which have been ferociously pro-Brexit. Which certainly suggests a distinct difference in philosophy.
Indeed the English and Welsh seats with declining populations were particularly Brexity in 2016. It is almost as if economic decline mattered more than immigration.
That I can believe - but it is difficult to reconcile with the reasons often given.
Austerity. Cameron and Osborne shot their government careers (and the country) in the foot.
OK, that is pretty cringy even from the Telegraph, even if I'd hope it was tongue in cheek to upset 'the right people'.
And as a royalist, I don't kneel before the genetic line we have, they merely happen to be the ones in place. Essentially any monarch will do under the system, the country essentially said as much 300 years ago when it set a bunch of succession rules.
Isn’t owning the libs a bit passé?
Slight shocked that you'd accept, say, Andrew as your monarch on a point of principle.
If it were him it probably would be a problem. But a problem monarch is very easily fixed, and if they don't cooperate on that the whole system no longer works and we would have to get rid of it.
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
Er, when they tried to get a YES vote in 2014, the SNP were explicitly and openly hoping for a vote which would automatically eject Scotland from the EU.
The SNP doesn't give a shit about the EU. Whatever gets them to indy is all that matters, and they now see being pro-EU, when before they were happy to leave the EU, as beneficial to the indy cause.
... to join the EU as an independent country. They would like to have joined without having a gap and somewhat pretended there wouldn't be one. The concept of Scotland as part of the European mainstream has been embedded for centuries*.
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
I don't know why they are framing it that way. Seems like it would be easy enough to vote against a deal, noting that there is no danger of no deal, and so there is no need for them to even implicitly support this consequence of the Brexit project. Rather than pretend through linguistic trickery that the alternative to this specific issue is EU membership.
It doesn't matter that we left the EU nearly a year ago - too many Brexiteers insisted that the last 11 months were the battle for Brexit. As they own the agenda that became the narrative. So why not exploit this stupidity? We leave the EU with this deal - so sayeth the people who want to leave. So attack the deal. Its a free hit.
But it isn't free because it pointlessly sacrifices the high ground when next they point out some Tory hypocrisy or intentional misleading, when the same point can easily be made without it. Seems like the sort of needless thing people do when they know they are far enough ahead for it not to matter.
"If history teaches us anything, it is that this country’s mixture of cap-doffing and unassailable privilege tends to keep even the most rotten hierarchies in place, and the saga grinds on. This is the essence of the very British mess that we seem unable to escape."
I would only add, of course, that Scotland may well be able to escape.
I get very wary of any analysis that hinges upon a vision of the country as implacably locked in some cap doffing culture and the like. Like a lot of things where the answer is class issues, it seems like people are acting the hammer looking for a nail.
Remember all things being equal the May locals will consist of elections which were last contested in 2016 when the Tories did meh, and 2017 where the Tories absolutely smashed it and Labour were beaten like morning wood.
So the council results should be bad for the government, they usually are for parties that have been in power for eleven years.
Yes, I know quite a few Tories who expected it to be pretty bad in 2017, but it was at just the right moment and they did well. With the super sizing of this election, a bad night could look like a really bad night (though results will take several days this time), and though expected to a degree the scale of the bad night will be interesting.
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
Er, when they tried to get a YES vote in 2014, the SNP were explicitly and openly hoping for a vote which would automatically eject Scotland from the EU.
The SNP doesn't give a shit about the EU. Whatever gets them to indy is all that matters, and they now see being pro-EU, when before they were happy to leave the EU, as beneficial to the indy cause.
... to join the EU as an independent country. They would like to have joined without having a gap and somewhat pretended there wouldn't be one. The concept of Scotland as part of the European mainstream has been embedded for centuries.
"Somewhat pretended". That is to say, they lied.
If Scotland goes indy in the 2020s, and the EU looks less appealing - having become much more Federalised, interim - I can easily see the SNP splitting and half of them campaigning to stay out. Especially when you factor in fish and farming and the euro, all of which will be unappealingly difficult in terms of EU membership.
The SNP wants indy. That's it. Anything that furthers that cause is welcome, even if it contradicts what they said last week.
And that is fine. They are a party with one overriding passion, the clue is in their name. What is ludicrous is when they claim to be principled or consistent.
"If history teaches us anything, it is that this country’s mixture of cap-doffing and unassailable privilege tends to keep even the most rotten hierarchies in place, and the saga grinds on. This is the essence of the very British mess that we seem unable to escape."
I would only add, of course, that Scotland may well be able to escape.
I get very wary of any analysis that hinges upon a vision of the country as implacably locked in some cap doffing culture and the like. Like a lot of things where the answer is class issues, it seems like people are acting the hammer looking for a nail.
Sometimes it is a nail though.
And sometimes there really is a wolf. Sure, I should deal with that nail and that wolf if they are indeed there, but I don't think it unreasonable for there to be a degree of confusion when people are always going on about nails and wolves, even when they are not there.
Sometimes it is a nail. But it often isn't, but people insist on it regardless.
On our political culture, I don't know, people talk about class too much in this country for it to be meaningless, but it feels too simplistic to me.
Remember all things being equal the May locals will consist of elections which were last contested in 2016 when the Tories did meh, and 2017 where the Tories absolutely smashed it and Labour were beaten like morning wood.
So the council results should be bad for the government, they usually are for parties that have been in power for eleven years.
Yes, I know quite a few Tories who expected it to be pretty bad in 2017, but it was at just the right moment and they did well. With the super sizing of this election, a bad night could look like a really bad night (though results will take several days this time), and though expected to a degree the scale of the bad night will be interesting.
However in the end if CON do get creamed they can just say 'mid term'. In the 'old days' ie 80s LAB used to win by 10 to 15% mid term local elections, it didn't help them much in the following GEs.
Depressing news on PB tonight. Covid is still gaining on us. The shadow of the monster grows.
We need that Astra Zeneca vaccine ASAFP even if it is a bit iffy. We need millions of arms injected through January.
What news? I haven't seen it.
See the various personal reports from hospitals (foxy et al) and the Guardian article about hospitals clearing all non-Covid work until the end of March.
Remember all things being equal the May locals will consist of elections which were last contested in 2016 when the Tories did meh, and 2017 where the Tories absolutely smashed it and Labour were beaten like morning wood.
So the council results should be bad for the government, they usually are for parties that have been in power for eleven years.
Yes, I know quite a few Tories who expected it to be pretty bad in 2017, but it was at just the right moment and they did well. With the super sizing of this election, a bad night could look like a really bad night (though results will take several days this time), and though expected to a degree the scale of the bad night will be interesting.
However in the end if CON do creamed they can just say 'mid term'. In the 'old days' ie 80s LAB used to win by 10 to 15% mid term local elections, it didn't help them much in the following GEs.
Indeed, the Tories need not over panic about it. But for Tories used to being ahead in GE polling despite years in office, will they remain unruffled? 2019 seemed to spook them a lot (granted there was other stuff going on to worry about).
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
What would you like to see Labour offering?
As I've said before, we need to focus on bread and butter issues and have policies that will make a material difference to people's lives. And forget about the woke stuff that means nothing to the vast majority of people in the seats we need to win.
I think law and order funding is a good place to start
For sure. Cut crime. Catch the scrotes. Lock the feckers up. No bloody hand-wringing wibble about the criminals being society's victims. Priti in a red rosette.
Currently it is taking 3 years to get cases to trial. 3 years. In some cases longer. The "scrotes" have been caught and charged. But it will take years before they are tried. And the longer the wait the greater the chance of a Not Guilty verdict. Plus the pain and stress for victims and witnesses as well as for people who are, unfashionable as it is to say it, innocent until proven guilty.
Why? Because the government has repeatedly cut investment in the judicial system. It has cut funding. It has closed courts. It has sold them off. It has cut the sitting hours of judges. It has cut legal aid so trials take longer as defendants try to defend themselves.
So if you don't like this and think that Red Wall voters would like to have a criminal justice system that works, you should be asking for these cuts to be reversed. But I bet all those moaning about this will not do that. They get what they pay for. And they are currently paying for a 3rd world justice system. And that is what they are getting. No amount of speeches about being tough on criminals - whether it comes from Priti or anyone else - is going to change this until the government puts our money where its mouth is.
Yes, I don't really remember anyone in my adult life promising to be soft on crime, I don't see why they cannot keep the stern rhetoric and also put in effort on the systemic problems. Yes, I know there are easy stories about costs of things, but it doesn't seem hard to make it a vote winner to promise to be tough, and to spend enough to make justice speedier etc.
I mean 'build more prisons' seems to be vote winner, so why not 'build more courts, hire more judges' and so on?
Cuts to legal aid, prison staff and a war on books were the signature policies of Justice Secretary Chris Grayling. Odd really, given how successful Grayling has been in all his other jobs.
Remember all things being equal the May locals will consist of elections which were last contested in 2016 when the Tories did meh, and 2017 where the Tories absolutely smashed it and Labour were beaten like morning wood.
So the council results should be bad for the government, they usually are for parties that have been in power for eleven years.
Yes, I know quite a few Tories who expected it to be pretty bad in 2017, but it was at just the right moment and they did well. With the super sizing of this election, a bad night could look like a really bad night (though results will take several days this time), and though expected to a degree the scale of the bad night will be interesting.
However in the end if CON do creamed they can just say 'mid term'. In the 'old days' ie 80s LAB used to win by 10 to 15% mid term local elections, it didn't help them much in the following GEs.
Indeed, the Tories need not over panic about it. But for Tories used to being ahead in GE polling despite years in office, will they remain unruffled? 2019 seemed to spook them a lot (granted there was other stuff going on to worry about).
I think CON will focus on COVID and (hopefully) an improving health situation as well as addressing the economic impact.
Just in case it's not obvious to anyone: that picture has clearly not been created by an eight-month old child. He's just done the hand-prints where the antlers would be, after his hands were guided to those positions (or the picture was strategically placed).
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
But Shipley is a traditional Tory seat which only falls to Labour in landslide years like 1997 when Marcus Fox was defeated. Labour also held on in 2001 before losing narrowly in 2005.
It was a target seat for us last year. We had a big get together with McDonnell and everything. And went backwards.
Just in case it's not obvious to anyone: that picture has clearly not been created by an eight-month old child. He's just done the hand-prints where the antlers would be, after his hands were guided to those positions (or the picture was strategically placed).
The subtitle in the tweet is stretching things beyond the tweet itself, sadly. Now people will feel let down by another Johnson due to poor communication. Is Wilfred advised by Dominic Cummings?
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
Er, when they tried to get a YES vote in 2014, the SNP were explicitly and openly hoping for a vote which would automatically eject Scotland from the EU.
The SNP doesn't give a shit about the EU. Whatever gets them to indy is all that matters, and they now see being pro-EU, when before they were happy to leave the EU, as beneficial to the indy cause.
... to join the EU as an independent country. They would like to have joined without having a gap and somewhat pretended there wouldn't be one. The concept of Scotland as part of the European mainstream has been embedded for centuries.
"Somewhat pretended". That is to say, they lied.
If Scotland goes indy in the 2020s, and the EU looks less appealing - having become much more Federalised, interim - I can easily see the SNP splitting and half of them campaigning to stay out. Especially when you factor in fish and farming and the euro, all of which will be unappealingly difficult in terms of EU membership.
The SNP wants indy. That's it. Anything that furthers that cause is welcome, even if it contradicts what they said last week.
And that is fine. They are a party with one overriding passion, the clue is in their name. What is ludicrous is when they claim to be principled or consistent.
What Labour needs to remember is that simply winning back all of the 2019 losses isn't enough. We need further gains to form a government, and that means making further inroads in the Midlands and North. My patch - Shipley - is a prime example. We need to understand why a plonker like Philip Davies can easily hold his seat here, and offer a set of policies to appeal to some of those who give him their vote.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
What would you like to see Labour offering?
As I've said before, we need to focus on bread and butter issues and have policies that will make a material difference to people's lives. And forget about the woke stuff that means nothing to the vast majority of people in the seats we need to win.
I think law and order funding is a good place to start
For sure. Cut crime. Catch the scrotes. Lock the feckers up. No bloody hand-wringing wibble about the criminals being society's victims. Priti in a red rosette.
Currently it is taking 3 years to get cases to trial. 3 years. In some cases longer. The "scrotes" have been caught and charged. But it will take years before they are tried. And the longer the wait the greater the chance of a Not Guilty verdict. Plus the pain and stress for victims and witnesses as well as for people who are, unfashionable as it is to say it, innocent until proven guilty.
Why? Because the government has repeatedly cut investment in the judicial system. It has cut funding. It has closed courts. It has sold them off. It has cut the sitting hours of judges. It has cut legal aid so trials take longer as defendants try to defend themselves.
So if you don't like this and think that Red Wall voters would like to have a criminal justice system that works, you should be asking for these cuts to be reversed. But I bet all those moaning about this will not do that. They get what they pay for. And they are currently paying for a 3rd world justice system. And that is what they are getting. No amount of speeches about being tough on criminals - whether it comes from Priti or anyone else - is going to change this until the government puts our money where its mouth is.
Yes, I don't really remember anyone in my adult life promising to be soft on crime, I don't see why they cannot keep the stern rhetoric and also put in effort on the systemic problems. Yes, I know there are easy stories about costs of things, but it doesn't seem hard to make it a vote winner to promise to be tough, and to spend enough to make justice speedier etc.
I mean 'build more prisons' seems to be vote winner, so why not 'build more courts, hire more judges' and so on?
Cuts to legal aid, prison staff and a war on books were the signature policies of Justice Secretary Chris Grayling. Odd really, given how successful Grayling has been in all his other jobs.
I've been (rather ineptly) playing the game Prison Architect today, and I could probably do a better job.
OK, that is pretty cringy even from the Telegraph, even if I'd hope it was tongue in cheek to upset 'the right people'.
And as a royalist, I don't kneel before the genetic line we have, they merely happen to be the ones in place. Essentially any monarch will do under the system, the country essentially said as much 300 years ago when it set a bunch of succession rules.
Isn’t owning the libs a bit passé?
Slight shocked that you'd accept, say, Andrew as your monarch on a point of principle.
I think Andrew would be forced to abdicate if there was any risk of him becoming Monarch.
The point of the Act of Succession is that it is ultimately Parliament that chooses the Monarch, not the accident of birth alone.
On the locals, I see some new Unitaries are going to be up for election. I am somewhat surprised to see that Buckinghamshire will apparently have 147 councillors, as the authorities really don't like very large councils and typically (though not always) reduce councils in size when they are up for review, even though that is not specifically an aim, so I'd assume the new ones would not break 100.
Remember all things being equal the May locals will consist of elections which were last contested in 2016 when the Tories did meh, and 2017 where the Tories absolutely smashed it and Labour were beaten like morning wood.
So the council results should be bad for the government, they usually are for parties that have been in power for eleven years.
Yes, I know quite a few Tories who expected it to be pretty bad in 2017, but it was at just the right moment and they did well. With the super sizing of this election, a bad night could look like a really bad night (though results will take several days this time), and though expected to a degree the scale of the bad night will be interesting.
Starmer needs to make sure that he celebrates a Labour success somewhere north of the Watford gap, highlighting us turning the tide.
A bit of homework figuring which councils are likely to flip will pay dividends.
On the locals, I see some new Unitaries are going to be up for election. I am somewhat surprised to see that Buckinghamshire will apparently have 147 councillors, as the authorities really don't like very large councils and typically (though not always) reduce councils in size when they are up for review, even though that is not specifically an aim, so I'd assume the new ones would not break 100.
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
Er, when they tried to get a YES vote in 2014, the SNP were explicitly and openly hoping for a vote which would automatically eject Scotland from the EU.
The SNP doesn't give a shit about the EU. Whatever gets them to indy is all that matters, and they now see being pro-EU, when before they were happy to leave the EU, as beneficial to the indy cause.
... to join the EU as an independent country. They would like to have joined without having a gap and somewhat pretended there wouldn't be one. The concept of Scotland as part of the European mainstream has been embedded for centuries.
"Somewhat pretended". That is to say, they lied.
If Scotland goes indy in the 2020s, and the EU looks less appealing - having become much more Federalised, interim - I can easily see the SNP splitting and half of them campaigning to stay out. Especially when you factor in fish and farming and the euro, all of which will be unappealingly difficult in terms of EU membership.
The SNP wants indy. That's it. Anything that furthers that cause is welcome, even if it contradicts what they said last week.
And that is fine. They are a party with one overriding passion, the clue is in their name. What is ludicrous is when they claim to be principled or consistent.
Yeah, but you're not exactly avoiding the spin either with your claim, "the SNP were explicitly and openly hoping for a vote which would automatically eject Scotland from the EU." The SNP had and have a policy that sees Scotland in the EU. There is little doubt that Scotland could be a member of the EU if it chooses and certainly would have done if it had become independent before Brexit.
Brexit does however force an independent Scotland to choose between a close relationship with what's left of the UK and with the EU. Paradoxically, while Brexit is a powerful motivator for independence, it may make it less likely for an independent Scotland actually to join the EU, for practical reasons. While Brexit forces Scotland to make a choice, that choice also gives it some bargaining power.
On the locals, I see some new Unitaries are going to be up for election. I am somewhat surprised to see that Buckinghamshire will apparently have 147 councillors, as the authorities really don't like very large councils and typically (though not always) reduce councils in size when they are up for review, even though that is not specifically an aim, so I'd assume the new ones would not break 100.
Durham County Council has over 120 and was the biggest to my recollection, but Cornwall is being reduced to below 90 this time around. I don't know of any others over 100. Not Manchester, which is close, I know that.
Interesting opinions of someone (ie Fox) who claims ‘she doesn’t know the answer’!
Well, I mean, who the fuck would want to go to Workington to get the story?
Oi! It's much more interesting than you think. How the hell are the Tories going to level up these areas if they adopt this sort of sneering attitude?
I suspect Marquee Mark was subtly insulting Clare Fox there, not laughing at the North
Uh-huh.
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
Good. I hope you succeed. 🤞
This Govt. would rather spend tens of billions of taxpayer money subsidising each of Hinkley C and Sizewell C for a far more expensive electricity that benefits France and China instead. It's bizarre.
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)
I see the Yoons have got another bullet from that dud pile. I wonder how long the really dumb ones will be looking down the barrel while frustratedly pulling the trigger? It was about three days after that genius move of the Sun staking out a funeral for a scoop.
Happy the SNP are voting for "a disastrous" No Deal?
Righto......
The SNP are playing a lot of Twister this Christmas......
SNP are voting against a deal that the EU negotiated with "sorrow". Saying "we want to rejoin as an independent state" isn't crapping on their deal in a way that upsets them. They didn't want to have to have to negotiate a deal
Er, when they tried to get a YES vote in 2014, the SNP were explicitly and openly hoping for a vote which would automatically eject Scotland from the EU.
The SNP doesn't give a shit about the EU. Whatever gets them to indy is all that matters, and they now see being pro-EU, when before they were happy to leave the EU, as beneficial to the indy cause.
... to join the EU as an independent country. They would like to have joined without having a gap and somewhat pretended there wouldn't be one. The concept of Scotland as part of the European mainstream has been embedded for centuries.
"Somewhat pretended". That is to say, they lied.
If Scotland goes indy in the 2020s, and the EU looks less appealing - having become much more Federalised, interim - I can easily see the SNP splitting and half of them campaigning to stay out. Especially when you factor in fish and farming and the euro, all of which will be unappealingly difficult in terms of EU membership.
The SNP wants indy. That's it. Anything that furthers that cause is welcome, even if it contradicts what they said last week.
And that is fine. They are a party with one overriding passion, the clue is in their name. What is ludicrous is when they claim to be principled or consistent.
At least they’ve kept the same name for 86 years.
I remember an old poster who had this obsession about the SNP "taking Scotland out of Europe" who refused to take me up on a bet prior to SindyRef that if Scotland became independent they would be full EU members within 5 years. It was weird.
Comments
Whilst some might argue for a transaction tax, having one applied via this route might not have not gone down well...
However, it does mean the Conservatives have to run pretty fast to stand still. Not impossible, but not a trivial problem, either.
It also creates a tricky problem for the Conservative Levelling Up Agenda. There is an answer, involving cyber hubs for remote working. It would be a sensible use of the experience built up in 2020. But an influx of young knowledge workers to (say) Dewsbury and the nice surrounding towns wouldn't be good news for its new Conservative MP. What's an ambitious scamp to do?
I hope Nicola has her mask on.
Happy Christmas to you both
This, surely, is why AstraZen are hurrying their jab to market.
Supercovid is a bitch, and this new vaccine is maybe the only way give her a slap.
And that is just to form a minority government with SNP support. Let's not kid ourselves that it is going to be easy.
As I've been saying, I don't think the vaccine will ease hospital pressure fast enough, even if it reduces the death toll in a month or so. I am quite concerned about what happens then.
--AS
(The Reuters article make some comments suggesting various conflicts of interest. I think they are probably largely off-base, but we should look again at scientists running studies into medication where they personally may profit from a certain outcome. It's not a good look, no matter how carefully managed.)
--AS
The other seat is NW Leics but that has changed substantially from when Labour last took it in 1997. I cannot see that happening again. It has gone down the rabbit hole. The complete dipstick Andrew Bridgen has a 20 000 majority there now.
Interesting
She went off to Spain for Christmas, a day ahead of Tier 4 starting. She needed some time with family before coming back. She is our sole Iberian nurse remaining from the group of over 30 who joined in 2015. The rest have all gone.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/27/history-britain-ruling-class-created-crisis-boris-johnson-brexit-covid
"If history teaches us anything, it is that this country’s mixture of cap-doffing and unassailable privilege tends to keep even the most rotten hierarchies in place, and the saga grinds on. This is the essence of the very British mess that we seem unable to escape."
I would only add, of course, that Scotland may well be able to escape.
https://twitter.com/jmartNYT/status/1343299426740285447
The SNP doesn't give a shit about the EU. Whatever gets them to indy is all that matters, and they now see being pro-EU, when before they were happy to leave the EU, as beneficial to the indy cause.
https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1343279444547538945?s=21
Why? Because the government has repeatedly cut investment in the judicial system. It has cut funding. It has closed courts. It has sold them off. It has cut the sitting hours of judges. It has cut legal aid so trials take longer as defendants try to defend themselves.
So if you don't like this and think that Red Wall voters would like to have a criminal justice system that works, you should be asking for these cuts to be reversed. But I bet all those moaning about this will not do that. They get what they pay for. And they are currently paying for a 3rd world justice system. And that is what they are getting. No amount of speeches about being tough on criminals - whether it comes from Priti or anyone else - is going to change this until the government puts our money where its mouth is.
And as a royalist, I don't kneel before the genetic line we have, they merely happen to be the ones in place. Essentially any monarch will do under the system, the country essentially said as much 300 years ago when it set a bunch of succession rules.
I mean 'build more prisons' seems to be vote winner, so why not 'build more courts, hire more judges' and so on?
Slight shocked that you'd accept, say, Andrew as your monarch on a point of principle.
We need that Astra Zeneca vaccine ASAFP even if it is a bit iffy. We need millions of arms injected through January.
* At least since Alexander II (13C)
If Scotland goes indy in the 2020s, and the EU looks less appealing - having become much more Federalised, interim - I can easily see the SNP splitting and half of them campaigning to stay out. Especially when you factor in fish and farming and the euro, all of which will be unappealingly difficult in terms of EU membership.
The SNP wants indy. That's it. Anything that furthers that cause is welcome, even if it contradicts what they said last week.
And that is fine. They are a party with one overriding passion, the clue is in their name. What is ludicrous is when they claim to be principled or consistent.
Sometimes it is a nail. But it often isn't, but people insist on it regardless.
On our political culture, I don't know, people talk about class too much in this country for it to be meaningless, but it feels too simplistic to me.
The NHS is expecting the worst.
I have actually been to Workington. (Ross's Gull).
I've also had a lovely chat with Mark Jenkinson, the MP for Workington. About trying to invest £7 billion there....
The point of the Act of Succession is that it is ultimately Parliament that chooses the Monarch, not the accident of birth alone.
A bit of homework figuring which councils are likely to flip will pay dividends.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckinghamshire_Council
I had thought Cornwall was the biggest.
Brexit does however force an independent Scotland to choose between a close relationship with what's left of the UK and with the EU. Paradoxically, while Brexit is a powerful motivator for independence, it may make it less likely for an independent Scotland actually to join the EU, for practical reasons. While Brexit forces Scotland to make a choice, that choice also gives it some bargaining power.
Durham County Council has over 120 and was the biggest to my recollection, but Cornwall is being reduced to below 90 this time around. I don't know of any others over 100. Not Manchester, which is close, I know that.
But the case for tidal keeps being made. One day they'll get built. (The recognised multiplier in civil engineering projects is 2.8 of the iniital spend. So having a £7 billion spend feels more like £20 billion to the local economies of Workington and Maryport.....)