Douglas Cusine wonders why the justice secretary hasn't done something to progress this inquiry process. Being perhaps a little more blunt than his former Aberdeen lordship can I suggest the explanation is that he doesn't have a clue what to do.
As any management expert will tell you, it a characteristic of mediocre and unsure people to appoint those who will not challenge or criticise them. It is vital that for once those holding the power to set up this inquiry put self-interest aside and appoint a proper person to the role. What's at stake here is a lot bigger than the narrow party political interest they wrongly hold so dear.
God this is embarrassing. Here I am pontificating about the dangers of a one party state with a complete disregard for civil liberties....from Scotland. Motes and beams come to mind, they really do. At least China doesn't waste so much time on the hypocrisy.
The six person SPCB pondering on publishing the report is chaired by Macintosh (SLab) and consists of another SLab MSP and one each from SNP, SCon, SLD and Green. What sort of one party state corruption do you think is going on?
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
He's simply setting out the mood music at this stage, trying to reassure both left and right of his party, and setting out the markers for a beginning of a rebranding exercise that isn't New Labour or Corbynism. The direction of travel is clear - Wilsonism, and, even if he isn't going explicitly oppose Brexit or create any expectation of rejoining, also a broadly more European model of business and social co-operation.
What would be the clear differences between SKS style Wilsonism and the current form of Borisism? Until that is pretty obvious the fight is going to be over details of the retail offer.
Jesus, thats the worst relaunch speech since Corbyn's in 2016
Shall I put you down as a maybe?
His analysis of what is wrong is spot on. Its what he's going to do about it that's missing. It needs to be bold, saleable as simple to understand, and buzzable where the person offering it has enough umph about them that you believe they can do it.
I haven’t seen the speech, didn’t know anything about it, but from what I have seen of Starmer, his problem is going to be the same as EdM’s, Gordon Brown’s, Michael Howard’s, William Hague’s, Neil Kinnock’s and Michael Foot’s - even if his ideas are good, he’s competing with someone who is better at selling ideas to the public than he is
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Certainly not with stupid ideas like a "recovery bond".
Why is this a stupid idea? I have a large amount of money in my savings account for which my bank offers me 0.01%. I'll take some Recovery Bonds assuming they can do better than that. Of course, they can't do any worse.
They could very easily do worse if recovery bonds offered 5% while inflation was 10%. See 1970s for more info.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Dan Hodges is an idiot. Ignore.
But it appears the content of Keir’s speech seems to have disappointed (if PB is any yardstick which it probably isn’t).
PB on average tends to lean centre-right, as in its majority choice for Ed Davey over Layla Moran, which is only one part of his potential constituency ; the test is the reaction first in the Red Wall, in liberal urban constituencies, and finally among the swing voters many of whom may have in past identified themselves with the centre-right.
My view is simple: I see Russia as a serious but containable threat and China as a potentially uncontainable threat, unless we take additional concerted action now.
For me the "Chinese threat" routinely conflates 2 things and the difference between them is greater than all the tea in ... China.
That they become the biggest and most successful economy on earth - closing and possibly even reversing the wealth gap with the West.
That they subjugate other nations and minorities within their own borders - e.g. Hong Kong, the Uighurs, parts of Africa.
I'm more concerned about the second. Indeed I'm not sure I'm bothered at all about the first. We have no god-given right to remain many times richer than the developing world. We've had a good run and much of it was based on exploitation of those now seeking to catch up.
Your not concerned that a power who think genocide is a perfectly satisfactory tool of state, who has no regard whatsoever for the rule of law, human rights or freedom of expression and an arrogant disregard for our IP property rights might become the most powerful economy on the planet?
I mean, wow. I would respectfully direct you towards @ydoethur's summer school.
I'm saying that's the aspect I am concerned about.
But you are not acknowledging that it is the economic power that makes it a concern. Read Kennedy's "The Rise and Fall of Great Powers". Its a truly brilliant history book but economic power and the ability to force others to comply to your will are just 2 sides of the same coin.
Obviously it is a good thing that the third world is catching up with the west. But China becoming economically dominant is a real and present danger to our way of life.
Yes, exploitation can create wealth and wealth allows exploitation, e.g. our Empire and others, but I don't view those things as so necessarily interlinked as to be two sides of the same coin. I'd say they are more of a vicious circle that is often observed. So I feel justified in decoupling them.
China has awoken, has become an economic superpower, and will continue to grow. To try and turn that tide is like howling at the moon. But the human rights abuses are something else. Linked, yes, but of a different gravy. They do not need always to be conflated with the economic argument. I find it odd that they are.
When I read articles warning about China I can often detect these two (to me) distinct threads in there. Half of it will talk economics, how China is set to overhaul the West in material living standards by xyz anno domini etc etc. The other half will talk about things like repression in Hong Kong and the slow genocide of the Uyghurs.
So then I read it that way - as two articles - and the latter stuff gets me fretting and chuntering whilst the former leaves me largely unmoved. That's the distinction I'm making and I think it's a valid one even though I realize there are crossovers between the two areas.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Certainly not with stupid ideas like a "recovery bond".
Why is this a stupid idea? I have a large amount of money in my savings account for which my bank offers me 0.01%. I'll take some Recovery Bonds assuming they can do better than that. Of course, they can't do any worse.
So you want a transfer of funds and public resources to older savers and the middle classes ?
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Certainly not with stupid ideas like a "recovery bond".
Why is this a stupid idea? I have a large amount of money in my savings account for which my bank offers me 0.01%. I'll take some Recovery Bonds assuming they can do better than that. Of course, they can't do any worse.
Getting the taxpayer to fund a guaranteed artificially high yield in competition with Building societies and banks? Not sure.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
Douglas Cusine wonders why the justice secretary hasn't done something to progress this inquiry process. Being perhaps a little more blunt than his former Aberdeen lordship can I suggest the explanation is that he doesn't have a clue what to do.
As any management expert will tell you, it a characteristic of mediocre and unsure people to appoint those who will not challenge or criticise them. It is vital that for once those holding the power to set up this inquiry put self-interest aside and appoint a proper person to the role. What's at stake here is a lot bigger than the narrow party political interest they wrongly hold so dear.
It would be more sensible than a politician from the party under investigation, at least.
The number of Covid-19 cases in Poland continues to rise, with the government considering reinstating some restrictions as a result. Last Friday, ski slopes were allowed to reopen with cinemas, theatres and hotels also allowed to open at half capacity.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
Maybe, indeed, Captain Tom *will* burn? According to his wiki profile he was an adulterer.
I found the tweet offensive, as I believe it was intended to be, but I am sure that the Freedom of Speech Tsar will get involved with this case as a priority.
@TheScreamingEagles, @TOPPING and other financial services people, we might have easy money coming in 2024 with Starmer's flagshagging bonds. Time to start a consultancy and stick the fees up!
LOL I'm in!
Meanwhile retail is piling like crazy into BTC. Just off the phone with a broker who can't move for the retail guys buying it.
Can't be having something that people are buying just because the price is going up.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Dan Hodges is an idiot. Ignore.
But it appears the content of Keir’s speech seems to have disappointed (if PB is any yardstick which it probably isn’t).
PB often tends to lean centre-right, as in its majority choice for Ed Davey over Layla Moran, which is only one part of his potential constituency ; the test is the reaction first in the Red Wall, in liberal urban constituencies, and finally among the swing voters many of whom may have flirted with the centre-right.
No one out in voter land will notice a word he has said about economics this morning. Depressing but sadly the reality.
If there is a constant repetition of a particular economic message or mood music over next three years then maybe it will cut through.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Dan Hodges is an idiot. Ignore.
But it appears the content of Keir’s speech seems to have disappointed (if PB is any yardstick which it probably isn’t).
I'm sure everybody commenting on here has listened to, or read, Starmer's speech carefully, and noticed how pro-business it it. But just in case anybody has forgotten to read it before commenting (as if), here it is:
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Dan Hodges is an idiot. Ignore.
But it appears the content of Keir’s speech seems to have disappointed (if PB is any yardstick which it probably isn’t).
PB often tends to lean centre-right, as in its majority choice for Ed Davey over Layla Moran, which is only one part of his potential constituency ; the test is the reaction first in the Red Wall, in liberal urban constituencies, and finally among the swing voters many of whom may have flirted with the centre-right.
No one out in voter land will notice a word he has said about economics this morning. Depressing but sadly the reality.
If there is a constant repetition of a particular economic message or mood music over next three years then maybe it will cut through.
Starmer needs a big idea.
He might as well go for something truly radical like UBI. Back to the 70s industrial policy isn't going to get many people excited.
I think this is right. No one I know gives a flying f about anything much other than when they can get the jab and this nightmare starts coming to an end.
When was he supposed to do it though? He cannot wait forever, but he can say stuff now and hammer it home so it sticks in the mind when people are paying more attention.
You are doing this wrong.
If Starmer says little its "When will Captain Hindsight come up with any policies?"
If Starmer says something its "Now is not the time for new policies!"
Wake me up when he does. Gilts are not a new policy.
You addressed the policy at least unlike most of the other posters who were offended he had a policy after being offended he had none. Not sure any policies that a mainstream party come up with are ever new though, they are (nearly) all recycled and adapted.
I don't object to him coming up with policies, he should. Hodges is wrong on that.
This is not a wise policy though. Its really worrying if he can't come up with something better than this.
Others do object downthread, not every post is about your posts.
I know others do object and I'm saying they're wrong to object. What more do you want me to say? 🤷🏻♂️
I only said what I believe because you replied to my post.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
Maybe, indeed, Captain Tom *will* burn? According to his wiki profile he was an adulterer.
I found the tweet offensive, as I believe it was intended to be, but I am sure that the Freedom of Speech Tsar will get involved with this case as a priority.
It's an opportunity for the FSU to get involved and defend this guy. They absolutely should, offensive speech isn't illegal.
The message I took from Keir's speech was back to a socialist agenda - bigger government to try and solve inequality.
Very little from a green agenda perspective or concerning skills and training.
In fairness, if ever people might be amendable to bigger government solutions it should be now - not that most conservatives are really that opposed to such when it suits of course.
I think this is right. No one I know gives a flying f about anything much other than when they can get the jab and this nightmare starts coming to an end.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Dan Hodges is an idiot. Ignore.
But it appears the content of Keir’s speech seems to have disappointed (if PB is any yardstick which it probably isn’t).
PB often tends to lean centre-right, as in its majority choice for Ed Davey over Layla Moran, which is only one part of his potential constituency ; the test is the reaction first in the Red Wall, in liberal urban constituencies, and finally among the swing voters many of whom may have flirted with the centre-right.
No one out in voter land will notice a word he has said about economics this morning. Depressing but sadly the reality.
If there is a constant repetition of a particular economic message or mood music over next three years then maybe it will cut through.
Starmer needs a big idea.
He might as well go for something truly radical like UBI. Back to the 70s industrial policy isn't going to get many people excited.
Instant reaction among my friends - government run ETF? Or invested in specific targets and if it's the latter who identifies the targets and on what basis.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Yes. Always the same.
So. What do you think? Does it form the basis for the development of a policy programme that might sweep Labour back to government on a tide of collective optimism?
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
He's simply setting out the mood music at this stage, trying to reassure both left and right of his party, and setting out the markers for a beginning of a rebranding exercise that isn't New Labour or Corbynism. The direction of travel is clear - Wilsonism, and, even if he isn't going explicitly oppose Brexit or create any expectation of rejoining, also a broadly more European model of business and social co-operation.
What would be the clear differences between SKS style Wilsonism and the current form of Borisism? Until that is pretty obvious the fight is going to be over details of the retail offer.
I think he's trying to create a civic language that Wilson also quite liked, that is really quite far from Borisism, I would say. Although he has a social-liberal approach to spending, Johnson is much more naturally comfortable with the language of laissez-faire libertarianism in his approach to business, for instance, than Starmer's approach of talking about business's responsibilities in a reciprocal contract, with a state that will also help it - very German or Scandinavian.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
@TheScreamingEagles, @TOPPING and other financial services people, we might have easy money coming in 2024 with Starmer's flagshagging bonds. Time to start a consultancy and stick the fees up!
LOL I'm in!
Meanwhile retail is piling like crazy into BTC. Just off the phone with a broker who can't move for the retail guys buying it.
Can't be having something that people are buying just because the price is going up.
Good luck to them. I'm sure there are plenty of BTC millionaires.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
I mean, of course it's offensive to most people, but it's not incitement to violence and the barrier for criminal charges needs to be much, much higher than those words.
@TheScreamingEagles, @TOPPING and other financial services people, we might have easy money coming in 2024 with Starmer's flagshagging bonds. Time to start a consultancy and stick the fees up!
LOL I'm in!
Meanwhile retail is piling like crazy into BTC. Just off the phone with a broker who can't move for the retail guys buying it.
Can't be having something that people are buying just because the price is going up.
Good luck to them. I'm sure there are plenty of BTC millionaires.
But as with so much else, timing is all.
I think the price is going up with the pandemic tbh. Once people can lead normal lives again can't see it having the appeal.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
I mean, of course it's offensive to most people, but it's not incitement to violence and the barrier for criminal charges needs to be much, much higher than those words.
We're so desperately in need of a Freedom of Speech Act to defend the rights of everyone - even utter pillocks like this chap.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Dan Hodges is an idiot. Ignore.
But it appears the content of Keir’s speech seems to have disappointed (if PB is any yardstick which it probably isn’t).
PB often tends to lean centre-right, as in its majority choice for Ed Davey over Layla Moran, which is only one part of his potential constituency ; the test is the reaction first in the Red Wall, in liberal urban constituencies, and finally among the swing voters many of whom may have flirted with the centre-right.
No one out in voter land will notice a word he has said about economics this morning. Depressing but sadly the reality.
If there is a constant repetition of a particular economic message or mood music over next three years then maybe it will cut through.
Starmer needs a big idea.
He might as well go for something truly radical like UBI. Back to the 70s industrial policy isn't going to get many people excited.
True the UBi would be a radical change as would ending UC with another system.
@TheScreamingEagles, @TOPPING and other financial services people, we might have easy money coming in 2024 with Starmer's flagshagging bonds. Time to start a consultancy and stick the fees up!
LOL I'm in!
Meanwhile retail is piling like crazy into BTC. Just off the phone with a broker who can't move for the retail guys buying it.
Can't be having something that people are buying just because the price is going up.
Good luck to them. I'm sure there are plenty of BTC millionaires.
But as with so much else, timing is all.
I think the price is going up with the pandemic tbh. Once people can lead normal lives again can't see it having the appeal.
Retail investment volumes have skyrocketed this past year. All the online/smartphone platforms have seen trading up by a factor of 10 or 20. So yes, people are at home, surfing the web and looking, I daresay, at the shareprice graph.
We shall see what transpires when things settle down.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Certainly not with stupid ideas like a "recovery bond".
Why is this a stupid idea? I have a large amount of money in my savings account for which my bank offers me 0.01%. I'll take some Recovery Bonds assuming they can do better than that. Of course, they can't do any worse.
This is all about helping savers? Well, why not just put up interest rates?
The electrical engineering companies might well have thrived had they avoided the government imposed GEC monopoly, but would our car and computer industries have turned out much different ?
The car industry: no, not whilst the union thugs were still in place.
The computer industry? Difficult to say. It's unlikely that English Electric and ICT would have escaped the fate of Sperry Univac, Burroughs, Xerox etc even if they hadn't been shoehorned into ICL.
I think you're being unduly generous to the car unions; management deserves its share of the blame too.
Our current car industry face a similar existential reckoning over the next few years. It's all going to depend on competitively priced battery supply, and although there have been a few bits of recent encouraging news, we're a long way behind the European competition in getting major plant construction started.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
@TheScreamingEagles, @TOPPING and other financial services people, we might have easy money coming in 2024 with Starmer's flagshagging bonds. Time to start a consultancy and stick the fees up!
LOL I'm in!
Meanwhile retail is piling like crazy into BTC. Just off the phone with a broker who can't move for the retail guys buying it.
Can't be having something that people are buying just because the price is going up.
Good luck to them. I'm sure there are plenty of BTC millionaires.
But as with so much else, timing is all.
I think the price is going up with the pandemic tbh. Once people can lead normal lives again can't see it having the appeal.
Retail investment volumes have skyrocketed this past year. All the online/smartphone platforms have seen trading up by a factor of 10 or 20. So yes, people are at home, surfing the web and looking, I daresay, at the shareprice graph.
We shall see what transpires when things settle down.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Dan Hodges is an idiot. Ignore.
But it appears the content of Keir’s speech seems to have disappointed (if PB is any yardstick which it probably isn’t).
PB often tends to lean centre-right, as in its majority choice for Ed Davey over Layla Moran, which is only one part of his potential constituency ; the test is the reaction first in the Red Wall, in liberal urban constituencies, and finally among the swing voters many of whom may have flirted with the centre-right.
No one out in voter land will notice a word he has said about economics this morning. Depressing but sadly the reality.
If there is a constant repetition of a particular economic message or mood music over next three years then maybe it will cut through.
Starmer needs a big idea.
He might as well go for something truly radical like UBI. Back to the 70s industrial policy isn't going to get many people excited.
True the UBi would be a radical change as would ending UC with another system.
Just had a LibDem leaflet for May's county elections. Mentions UBI.
@TheScreamingEagles, @TOPPING and other financial services people, we might have easy money coming in 2024 with Starmer's flagshagging bonds. Time to start a consultancy and stick the fees up!
LOL I'm in!
Meanwhile retail is piling like crazy into BTC. Just off the phone with a broker who can't move for the retail guys buying it.
Can't be having something that people are buying just because the price is going up.
Good luck to them. I'm sure there are plenty of BTC millionaires.
But as with so much else, timing is all.
I think the price is going up with the pandemic tbh. Once people can lead normal lives again can't see it having the appeal.
Retail investment volumes have skyrocketed this past year. All the online/smartphone platforms have seen trading up by a factor of 10 or 20. So yes, people are at home, surfing the web and looking, I daresay, at the shareprice graph.
We shall see what transpires when things settle down.
My shoeshine chap says 'hi'.
Well done him. And tbf I was dismissing it as an investment when it was $5,000 so 10x the price later the joke's on me.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
I mean, of course it's offensive to most people, but it's not incitement to violence and the barrier for criminal charges needs to be much, much higher than those words.
I've always found it amusing that the psychopathic villain of Demolition Man had at least one thing right. You cant take away peoples right to be arseholes.
Hold on, Starmer is saying that the government will raise the money and then use it to invest in the private sector? Is he proposing a sovereign wealth fund? Who is going to do the investing, will he have fund managers that get paid £1m+ salaries/bonuses on staff to do it? Is he going to hand the civil service this money and have people with no experience in investing be put in charge of a multi-billion fund?
This raises so many questions.
I think you can be very confident that if this ever were to happen under a Labour government, the investing policy would be such that the quality of the actual investment case would be entirely irrelevant.
The idea of a domestically focussed sovereign wealth fund is hilarious to me. I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You'd end up with a million and one agendas on how to invest the money and ultimately it ends up as a gigantic tracker fund or just gets wasted propping up failing business models.
One area it might be useful is house building. Council houses are already effectively a form of sovereign wealth fund. Moving the windfall gains from grant of planning permission from the private sector to the public sector makes sense to me.
Citizens Bonds is a great idea for Labour. Economically it's a shift towards collectivism and government intervention. Tick. Politically it will appeal to both the old base (Red Wall) and the new base (me). Double tick.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
I mean, of course it's offensive to most people, but it's not incitement to violence and the barrier for criminal charges needs to be much, much higher than those words.
We're so desperately in need of a Freedom of Speech Act to defend the rights of everyone - even utter pillocks like this chap.
Standing up for freedom of speech does indeed mean standing up for some utter pillocks - but the alternative is a long and slippery slope of only 'approved' views being allowed, as we have seen in recent years.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
I mean, of course it's offensive to most people, but it's not incitement to violence and the barrier for criminal charges needs to be much, much higher than those words.
We're so desperately in need of a Freedom of Speech Act to defend the rights of everyone - even utter pillocks like this chap.
Freedom of Speech only means anything if you defend the speech of those you disapprove of - or find offensive.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Certainly not with stupid ideas like a "recovery bond".
Why is this a stupid idea? I have a large amount of money in my savings account for which my bank offers me 0.01%. I'll take some Recovery Bonds assuming they can do better than that. Of course, they can't do any worse.
They could very easily do worse if recovery bonds offered 5% while inflation was 10%. See 1970s for more info.
But I'd still be losing less than I would lose at the bank.
Hold on, Starmer is saying that the government will raise the money and then use it to invest in the private sector? Is he proposing a sovereign wealth fund? Who is going to do the investing, will he have fund managers that get paid £1m+ salaries/bonuses on staff to do it? Is he going to hand the civil service this money and have people with no experience in investing be put in charge of a multi-billion fund?
This raises so many questions.
I think you can be very confident that if this ever were to happen under a Labour government, the investing policy would be such that the quality of the actual investment case would be entirely irrelevant.
The idea of a domestically focussed sovereign wealth fund is hilarious to me. I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You'd end up with a million and one agendas on how to invest the money and ultimately it ends up as a gigantic tracker fund or just gets wasted propping up failing business models.
One area it might be useful is house building. Council houses are already effectively a form of sovereign wealth fund. Moving the windfall gains from grant of planning permission from the private sector to the public sector makes sense to me.
Citizens Bonds is a great idea for Labour. Economically it's a shift towards collectivism and government intervention. Tick. Politically it will appeal to both the old base (Red Wall) and the new base (me). Double tick.
Keir Starmer has arrived.
Bonds are quite complicated as a retail offering. Coupons and tenor and duration and whatnot.
Not to say there won't be an illustrated guide making the simple argument about investment and interest but you must stop thinking that everyone out there is as sophisticated as you are.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Dan Hodges is an idiot. Ignore.
But it appears the content of Keir’s speech seems to have disappointed (if PB is any yardstick which it probably isn’t).
PB often tends to lean centre-right, as in its majority choice for Ed Davey over Layla Moran, which is only one part of his potential constituency ; the test is the reaction first in the Red Wall, in liberal urban constituencies, and finally among the swing voters many of whom may have flirted with the centre-right.
No one out in voter land will notice a word he has said about economics this morning. Depressing but sadly the reality.
If there is a constant repetition of a particular economic message or mood music over next three years then maybe it will cut through.
Starmer needs a big idea.
Ok, here's one:
A Worker's charter.
Millions of people are given the status of self employed or are employed on a casual labour basis which amounts to a zero hour contract. The EU (optional sob) created the concept of a "worker" who was given certain basic rights. But we need to go much further. So:
1. All "workers" whether self employed, casual or temporary who earn less than the median wage must be fully covered by the Employers Liability Insurance of those contracting their services.
2. The fee for all or any work taken on by a worker will work out at not less than the National Living Wage for that work.
3. Where appropriate, that calculation will include the reasonable cost of their own transport, if they provide it.
4. Any shifts or periods of work cancelled at less than 7 days notice will be paid at at least half the rate that they would have been had the shifts or period of work been worked.
5. Anyone who is "employed" as a "worker" for more than 12 months in the same position will be given a set of equivalent employment rights such as an entitlement to notice, unfair dismissal, non discrimination, redundancy.
6. All "employers" of "workers" will be liable for employers NI on their earnings and to keep records that will allow their tax liabilities to be ascertained.
Trade Unions and employers representatives will be encouraged to debate the extension of these rights, having due regard to the effect on employment, and to make joint representations to a commission to be appointed for that purpose.
People may or may not like this idea. But that is not really the point. The point is that it addresses a real and increasing problem in our workforce, it shows which side he is on and it sets out a clear way forward.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Dan Hodges is an idiot. Ignore.
But it appears the content of Keir’s speech seems to have disappointed (if PB is any yardstick which it probably isn’t).
PB on average tends to lean centre-right, as in its majority choice for Ed Davey over Layla Moran, which is only one part of his potential constituency ; the test is the reaction first in the Red Wall, in liberal urban constituencies, and finally among the swing voters many of whom may have in past identified themselves with the centre-right.
PB on average tends to lean to economically centre-right but it is also socially liberal and anti hard Brexit overall.
Hold on, Starmer is saying that the government will raise the money and then use it to invest in the private sector? Is he proposing a sovereign wealth fund? Who is going to do the investing, will he have fund managers that get paid £1m+ salaries/bonuses on staff to do it? Is he going to hand the civil service this money and have people with no experience in investing be put in charge of a multi-billion fund?
This raises so many questions.
I think you can be very confident that if this ever were to happen under a Labour government, the investing policy would be such that the quality of the actual investment case would be entirely irrelevant.
The idea of a domestically focussed sovereign wealth fund is hilarious to me. I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You'd end up with a million and one agendas on how to invest the money and ultimately it ends up as a gigantic tracker fund or just gets wasted propping up failing business models.
One area it might be useful is house building. Council houses are already effectively a form of sovereign wealth fund. Moving the windfall gains from grant of planning permission from the private sector to the public sector makes sense to me.
Citizens Bonds is a great idea for Labour. Economically it's a shift towards collectivism and government intervention. Tick. Politically it will appeal to both the old base (Red Wall) and the new base (me). Double tick.
Keir Starmer has arrived.
I'm glad you approve.
Confirms its a bad idea.
PS curious about the idea you're a "new base". Which was the last General Election you didn't vote Labour? Which was the last General Election you did vote Tory?
I think you're being unduly generous to the car unions; management deserves its share of the blame too.
True, but they were reacting rationally to the incentives they were presented with. Rather than building cars people would want to buy, given a free choice, and with all the union problems making it impossible to become more efficient, it was just so much easier to go to government every couple of years and demand ever-larger subsidies to 'protect jobs' and to (temporarily) end strikes.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
My view is simple: I see Russia as a serious but containable threat and China as a potentially uncontainable threat, unless we take additional concerted action now.
For me the "Chinese threat" routinely conflates 2 things and the difference between them is greater than all the tea in ... China.
That they become the biggest and most successful economy on earth - closing and possibly even reversing the wealth gap with the West.
That they subjugate other nations and minorities within their own borders - e.g. Hong Kong, the Uighurs, parts of Africa.
I'm more concerned about the second. Indeed I'm not sure I'm bothered at all about the first. We have no god-given right to remain many times richer than the developing world. We've had a good run and much of it was based on exploitation of those now seeking to catch up.
You're not concerned that a power who think genocide is a perfectly satisfactory tool of state, who has no regard whatsoever for the rule of law, human rights or freedom of expression and an arrogant disregard for our IP property rights might become the most powerful economy on the planet?
I mean, wow. I would respectfully direct you towards @ydoethur's summer school.
The problem for China is that no-one in the Rest of the World, just no-one, would rather live in a society like China's rather than, say, the US, UK, EU or other countries that share our values. Ultimately that will tell.
In the long run it could tell in 2 ways. It could drag them down. Or it could lead to liberalization. I won't pretend to have much of a clue as to which will win out.
As an eternal optimist I think evolutionary liberalisation will win out. How long it takes is anyone's guess. It took the UK a very long time to move from absolute monarchy to oligarchy to something that just about passes for democracy. The important piece in the UKs development was the development of the system of law, which originally evolved to ensure property rights. China might get there in about 100 years perhaps. Then maybe in another hundred years and they will still have hereditary "People's Representatives" in their Upper House and an hereditary "Chairperson", but otherwise might have a relatively benign democracy lol.
Then they'll have a sudden regression into Little China mentality and decide they no longer wish to pool sovereignty with the "AU" - cue a messy 5 years of Getting Chexit Done.
Many being very unfair to poor Keir Starmer today.
I defy anyone to come up with a set of policies that appeal to Sadiq Khan's London, the red wall of the North and the old heartlands of Scotland at the same time.
Lol. Ok, the riff about all the actual events cancelled by wokists turned out to be bollocks, let’s move on to all the ones that might have been if hadn’t been for the wokists. No one’s actually proved unicorns don’t exist, right? https://twitter.com/goodwinmj/status/1362354425155776513?s=21
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
I mean, of course it's offensive to most people, but it's not incitement to violence and the barrier for criminal charges needs to be much, much higher than those words.
Do you know what?
I'm not so sure about that. If he'd just said "burn auld fella, burn" then that'd be grossly offensive but not in any way criminal.
Propagating a message online that "the only good British soldier is a dead one" could be incitement, and people have responded or been inspired by less in the past, and for me it's at least borderline.
Many being very unfair to poor Keir Starmer today.
I defy anyone to come up with a set of policies that appeal to Sadiq Khan's London, the red wall of the North and the old heartlands of Scotland at the same time.
May I refer the honourable member to my post of 12.56?
Polls: I suspect what's happening is wavering Tories and doubters have firmed up behind Johnson, whilst Starmer's support base has frayed.
I still think that means parity of votes in a GE, which would still translate into the Tories on between 300-330 seats because of the coalition and how they're positioned in the marginals.
Plenty of time. But he does need something of his to really catch people's attention and fix an image in peoples' minds. Goodness knows what though.
Starmer is awful, dull and clueless, as his actions in 2019 demonstrated.
He's also a nasty arsehole careerist.
While MPs like Luciana Berger were getting bullied out of the Labour Party he chose to serve in the Shadow Cabinet to further his own career and put forward Corbyn as PM.
Only those who refused to serve under Corbyn should have been considered as possible Labour Party leaders. A Labour led by Yvette Cooper would be a credible threat right now.
A Celtic fan has denied sending an 'offensive' tweet about Captain Sir Tom Moore that read 'burn, auld fella, buuurn' a day after the war hero and NHS fundraiser's death.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
I mean, of course it's offensive to most people, but it's not incitement to violence and the barrier for criminal charges needs to be much, much higher than those words.
I've always found it amusing that the psychopathic villain of Demolition Man had at least one thing right. You cant take away peoples right to be arseholes.
Underrated movie.
Love it, but why did that film have to be so prophetic about the rise of authoritarian do-gooding but so inaccurate about everything else? I was so confident that every home would be using the three sea-shells by 2021...
Hold on, Starmer is saying that the government will raise the money and then use it to invest in the private sector? Is he proposing a sovereign wealth fund? Who is going to do the investing, will he have fund managers that get paid £1m+ salaries/bonuses on staff to do it? Is he going to hand the civil service this money and have people with no experience in investing be put in charge of a multi-billion fund?
This raises so many questions.
I think you can be very confident that if this ever were to happen under a Labour government, the investing policy would be such that the quality of the actual investment case would be entirely irrelevant.
The idea of a domestically focussed sovereign wealth fund is hilarious to me. I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You'd end up with a million and one agendas on how to invest the money and ultimately it ends up as a gigantic tracker fund or just gets wasted propping up failing business models.
One area it might be useful is house building. Council houses are already effectively a form of sovereign wealth fund. Moving the windfall gains from grant of planning permission from the private sector to the public sector makes sense to me.
Citizens Bonds is a great idea for Labour. Economically it's a shift towards collectivism and government intervention. Tick. Politically it will appeal to both the old base (Red Wall) and the new base (me). Double tick.
Keir Starmer has arrived.
Bonds are quite complicated as a retail offering. Coupons and tenor and duration and whatnot.
Not to say there won't be an illustrated guide making the simple argument about investment and interest but you must stop thinking that everyone out there is as sophisticated as you are.
I don't really get the point given that, for now at least, government can borrow both very long and very cheap.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Dan Hodges is an idiot. Ignore.
But it appears the content of Keir’s speech seems to have disappointed (if PB is any yardstick which it probably isn’t).
PB on average tends to lean centre-right, as in its majority choice for Ed Davey over Layla Moran, which is only one part of his potential constituency ; the test is the reaction first in the Red Wall, in liberal urban constituencies, and finally among the swing voters many of whom may have in past identified themselves with the centre-right.
PB on average tends to lean to economically centre-right but it is also socially liberal and anti hard Brexit overall.
Social liberalism can mean many things, and I would say that's partially true and partially not true.
Many being very unfair to poor Keir Starmer today.
I defy anyone to come up with a set of policies that appeal to Sadiq Khan's London, the red wall of the North and the old heartlands of Scotland at the same time.
May I refer the honourable member to my post of 12.56?
Plenty of time. But he does need something of his to really catch people's attention and fix an image in peoples' minds. Goodness knows what though.
Starmer is awful, dull and clueless, as his actions in 2019 demonstrated.
He's also a nasty arsehole careerist.
While MPs like Luciana Berger were getting bullied out of the Labour Party he chose to serve in the Shadow Cabinet to further his own career and put forward Corbyn as PM.
Only those who refused to serve under Corbyn should have been considered as possible Labour Party leaders. A Labour led by Yvette Cooper would be a credible threat right now.
Absolutely, Boris Johnson would always sack the bullies and defend the bullied.
Many being very unfair to poor Keir Starmer today.
I defy anyone to come up with a set of policies that appeal to Sadiq Khan's London, the red wall of the North and the old heartlands of Scotland at the same time.
To post a counter argument, I would like to propose the Starmer approach is very similar to the Cameron approach.
In 2007, Brown variously led Cameron on "most capable" PM (I can't seem to find "best PM" but if anyone does, I would be curious to see as that's a direct comparison), by quite a long way, reaching
So what changed? In that time the Tories were plugging away at the idea Labour had caused the crisis - and Brown's crisis boost in 2007/2008 had evaporated.
We seem almost exactly the same thing today. I am going to argue that the speech today was the first sign of a strategy to pin the blame on the Tories. Not for the crisis itself but for being badly prepared for it. This is exactly what Cameron did.
Hold on, Starmer is saying that the government will raise the money and then use it to invest in the private sector? Is he proposing a sovereign wealth fund? Who is going to do the investing, will he have fund managers that get paid £1m+ salaries/bonuses on staff to do it? Is he going to hand the civil service this money and have people with no experience in investing be put in charge of a multi-billion fund?
This raises so many questions.
I think you can be very confident that if this ever were to happen under a Labour government, the investing policy would be such that the quality of the actual investment case would be entirely irrelevant.
The idea of a domestically focussed sovereign wealth fund is hilarious to me. I don't see how anyone could take it seriously. You'd end up with a million and one agendas on how to invest the money and ultimately it ends up as a gigantic tracker fund or just gets wasted propping up failing business models.
One area it might be useful is house building. Council houses are already effectively a form of sovereign wealth fund. Moving the windfall gains from grant of planning permission from the private sector to the public sector makes sense to me.
Citizens Bonds is a great idea for Labour. Economically it's a shift towards collectivism and government intervention. Tick. Politically it will appeal to both the old base (Red Wall) and the new base (me). Double tick.
Keir Starmer has arrived.
The British Recovery bit sounds good. But 'bond' is just one of those financial terms like 'security' or 'gross profit' that no one normal really understands.
The prospect of giving the middle class a better savings rate (and making them feel good about it because they're investing in Britain) might prove popular.
After all - George Osborne did something fairly similar I think without the investing in Britain bit? If he thought it was smart politics, it probably was.
Plenty of time. But he does need something of his to really catch people's attention and fix an image in peoples' minds. Goodness knows what though.
Starmer is awful, dull and clueless, as his actions in 2019 demonstrated.
He's also a nasty arsehole careerist.
While MPs like Luciana Berger were getting bullied out of the Labour Party he chose to serve in the Shadow Cabinet to further his own career and put forward Corbyn as PM.
Only those who refused to serve under Corbyn should have been considered as possible Labour Party leaders. A Labour led by Yvette Cooper would be a credible threat right now.
Absolutely, Boris Johnson would always sack the bullies and defend the bullied.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Certainly not with stupid ideas like a "recovery bond".
Why is this a stupid idea? I have a large amount of money in my savings account for which my bank offers me 0.01%. I'll take some Recovery Bonds assuming they can do better than that. Of course, they can't do any worse.
They can - in a bank they will go in business loans with some chance of success. A recovery bond to get as good a result will need to dublicate their expertise and be shackled by ministerial or bureaucratic whim. When you look at the shadow cabinet that is a pretty frightening prospect.
Many being very unfair to poor Keir Starmer today.
I defy anyone to come up with a set of policies that appeal to Sadiq Khan's London, the red wall of the North and the old heartlands of Scotland at the same time.
May I refer the honourable member to my post of 12.56?
Plenty of time. But he does need something of his to really catch people's attention and fix an image in peoples' minds. Goodness knows what though.
Starmer is awful, dull and clueless, as his actions in 2019 demonstrated.
He's also a nasty arsehole careerist.
While MPs like Luciana Berger were getting bullied out of the Labour Party he chose to serve in the Shadow Cabinet to further his own career and put forward Corbyn as PM.
Only those who refused to serve under Corbyn should have been considered as possible Labour Party leaders. A Labour led by Yvette Cooper would be a credible threat right now.
Absolutely, Boris Johnson would always sack the bullies and defend the bullied.
Well he did indeed sack his own trouble makers like Phil Hammond who were undermining the party and good riddance to them.
Plenty of time. But he does need something of his to really catch people's attention and fix an image in peoples' minds. Goodness knows what though.
Starmer is awful, dull and clueless, as his actions in 2019 demonstrated.
He's also a nasty arsehole careerist.
While MPs like Luciana Berger were getting bullied out of the Labour Party he chose to serve in the Shadow Cabinet to further his own career and put forward Corbyn as PM.
Only those who refused to serve under Corbyn should have been considered as possible Labour Party leaders. A Labour led by Yvette Cooper would be a credible threat right now.
Absolutely, Boris Johnson would always sack the bullies and defend the bullied.
Well he did indeed sack his own trouble makers like Phil Hammond who were undermining the party and good riddance to them.
Have you any evidence that Phil Hammond ever bullied anyone?
Now contrast his behaviour when it comes to Priti Patel and the people she bullied.
Plenty of time. But he does need something of his to really catch people's attention and fix an image in peoples' minds. Goodness knows what though.
Starmer is awful, dull and clueless, as his actions in 2019 demonstrated.
He's also a nasty arsehole careerist.
While MPs like Luciana Berger were getting bullied out of the Labour Party he chose to serve in the Shadow Cabinet to further his own career and put forward Corbyn as PM.
Only those who refused to serve under Corbyn should have been considered as possible Labour Party leaders. A Labour led by Yvette Cooper would be a credible threat right now.
A Labour party led by Yvette Cooper or Liz Kendall would probably be at between 25 and 30%, roughly equivalent for Labour to Davey's standing. There's simply a much smaller market for business-friendly centrism now among non-Tory voters than there was in the late '90s and early 2000s, and especially before the financial crisis and its damage to the most straightforward enthusiasts of globalisation.
The Plan will talk about Stages. Not tiers or levels as they have been used before.
Stage 1 (8 March) - primary schools open, secondary schools maybe 15 March with enhanced testing. Limited social meeting outside allowed.
Stage 2 (29 March) - non essential retail opens.
Stage 3 (26 April) - pubs restaurants and hotels open. Inside and out. Maximum of two households mixing. Contact details required, mandatory table service, masks when moving around. No curfew or substantial meal. Domestic holidays allowed including going to holiday homes. One metre plus social distancing in operation.
Stage 4 (31 May) - opening of outdoor sporting areas with capacity restricted eg cricket.
Later (1 September) - subject to vaccine progress, return to near normal domestically.
The flaw there is it seems there is enormous pressure within the government, especially at the DfE, to operate all schools at full capacity* simultaneously from March 8th, regardless of the situation or the effect.
Why is uncertain. It has even been suggested that several very senior figures at the DfE are fed up with homeschooling their own less than pleasant children and want to quickly farm them back out to teachers.
Sadly, I find this all too plausible.
*Worded carefully, because they have never actually closed.
It's really difficult to call what will happen with secondary schools. Are we really ready for all schools to go back 8 March? There is clearly some political pressure there. The 'let's test secondary school pupils twice a week' idea maybe floated as the mitigation. I'm not convinced by that.
I'm more confident on my timings for nonessential retail and pubs than for secondary schools.
1. Labour is a policy void. Starmer needs to set out a vision of what Labour will do in a post-Covid world. And he needs to get on with it.
2. No, not now. Nobody's interested in anything other than vaccinations/Covid. Nobody's listening. Shut up Starmer.
Rinse and repeat. This seems to be the view of Dan Hodges and many on here. Poor chap can't win. (Oh, and even if we do listen it's rubbish).
He really can't win, can he?
Certainly not with stupid ideas like a "recovery bond".
Why is this a stupid idea? I have a large amount of money in my savings account for which my bank offers me 0.01%. I'll take some Recovery Bonds assuming they can do better than that. Of course, they can't do any worse.
They could very easily do worse if recovery bonds offered 5% while inflation was 10%. See 1970s for more info.
The principal risk is of never being able to sell them.
Comments
Douglas Cusine wonders why the justice secretary hasn't done something to progress this inquiry process. Being perhaps a little more blunt than his former Aberdeen lordship can I suggest the explanation is that he doesn't have a clue what to do.
As any management expert will tell you, it a characteristic of mediocre and unsure people to appoint those who will not challenge or criticise them. It is vital that for once those holding the power to set up this inquiry put self-interest aside and appoint a proper person to the role. What's at stake here is a lot bigger than the narrow party political interest they wrongly hold so dear.
Joseph Kelly, 35, from Castlemilk in Glasgow, allegedly tweeted on February 3: 'The only good Brit soldier is a deed one, burn auld fella, buuuuurn.' He was later charged under the Communications Act 2003.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9273781/Pictured-Celtic-fan-35-charged-offensive-tweet-Captain-Tom-Moore.html
China has awoken, has become an economic superpower, and will continue to grow. To try and turn that tide is like howling at the moon. But the human rights abuses are something else. Linked, yes, but of a different gravy. They do not need always to be conflated with the economic argument. I find it odd that they are.
When I read articles warning about China I can often detect these two (to me) distinct threads in there. Half of it will talk economics, how China is set to overhaul the West in material living standards by xyz anno domini etc etc. The other half will talk about things like repression in Hong Kong and the slow genocide of the Uyghurs.
So then I read it that way - as two articles - and the latter stuff gets me fretting and chuntering whilst the former leaves me largely unmoved. That's the distinction I'm making and I think it's a valid one even though I realize there are crossovers between the two areas.
How very progressive
What’s that got to do with the Police?
Maybe, indeed, Captain Tom *will* burn?
According to his wiki profile he was an adulterer.
Very little from a green agenda perspective or concerning skills and training.
If there is a constant repetition of a particular economic message or mood music over next three years then maybe it will cut through.
Starmer needs a big idea.
https://labourlist.org/2021/02/starmer-calls-for-covid-recovery-bonds-and-boosted-funding-for-start-up-loans/
I only said what I believe because you replied to my post.
Only the other day you were complaining as usual where SKS was.
But as with so much else, timing is all.
He described the move to "unfriend Australia" as arrogant and disappointing."
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-56109036
I mean, of course it's offensive to most people, but it's not incitement to violence and the barrier for criminal charges needs to be much, much higher than those words.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/02/18/fall-covid-19-deaths-greatest-among-vaccinated-unlike-first/
We shall see what transpires when things settle down.
https://twitter.com/IOMGovernment/status/1362369511127732225?s=20
IF it is the B117 they might be well advised to lock down, rather than "steady as she goes".
Our current car industry face a similar existential reckoning over the next few years. It's all going to depend on competitively priced battery supply, and although there have been a few bits of recent encouraging news, we're a long way behind the European competition in getting major plant construction started.
Underrated movie.
Keir Starmer has arrived.
I then read, OK skimmed, the text.
Very very dull, I’m afraid.
He is better than Miliband, and obviously a million times better than Corbyn...but he is not able to project, or seemingly imagine, positive change.
Boris must be wheezing all the way to the bank, as it were.
Not to say there won't be an illustrated guide making the simple argument about investment and interest but you must stop thinking that everyone out there is as sophisticated as you are.
A Worker's charter.
Millions of people are given the status of self employed or are employed on a casual labour basis which amounts to a zero hour contract. The EU (optional sob) created the concept of a "worker" who was given certain basic rights. But we need to go much further. So:
1. All "workers" whether self employed, casual or temporary who earn less than the median wage must be fully covered by the Employers Liability Insurance of those contracting their services.
2. The fee for all or any work taken on by a worker will work out at not less than the National Living Wage for that work.
3. Where appropriate, that calculation will include the reasonable cost of their own transport, if they provide it.
4. Any shifts or periods of work cancelled at less than 7 days notice will be paid at at least half the rate that they would have been had the shifts or period of work been worked.
5. Anyone who is "employed" as a "worker" for more than 12 months in the same position will be given a set of equivalent employment rights such as an entitlement to notice, unfair dismissal, non discrimination, redundancy.
6. All "employers" of "workers" will be liable for employers NI on their earnings and to keep records that will allow their tax liabilities to be ascertained.
Trade Unions and employers representatives will be encouraged to debate the extension of these rights, having due regard to the effect on employment, and to make joint representations to a commission to be appointed for that purpose.
People may or may not like this idea. But that is not really the point. The point is that it addresses a real and increasing problem in our workforce, it shows which side he is on and it sets out a clear way forward.
Simples.
Confirms its a bad idea.
PS curious about the idea you're a "new base". Which was the last General Election you didn't vote Labour? Which was the last General Election you did vote Tory?
(In the last week, rather than this week as in ‘since Monday’)
It seems only the other day that pb.com was awash with encomia on the wise & thoughtful good European from Meeks & Co. Jupiter, they called him.
My recollection from classical mythology is that Jupiter was a notorious rapist, prone to arbitrary & pernicious acts of lying, rapacity and violence.
So, the name does seem appropriate for a mendacious, self-serving sociopath, now out-muscling Le Pen on the Nationalist Right.
I defy anyone to come up with a set of policies that appeal to Sadiq Khan's London, the red wall of the North and the old heartlands of Scotland at the same time.
Ok, the riff about all the actual events cancelled by wokists turned out to be bollocks, let’s move on to all the ones that might have been if hadn’t been for the wokists. No one’s actually proved unicorns don’t exist, right?
https://twitter.com/goodwinmj/status/1362354425155776513?s=21
I'm not so sure about that. If he'd just said "burn auld fella, burn" then that'd be grossly offensive but not in any way criminal.
Propagating a message online that "the only good British soldier is a dead one" could be incitement, and people have responded or been inspired by less in the past, and for me it's at least borderline.
The red wall wants meaningful jobs.
Younger people want meaningful jobs.
Everyone wants a project of national renewal.
The Tories want to build Jerusalem by digging a hole between Larne and Stranraer, and bunging the cash to their mates.
But Keir says nothing about this really.
I still think that means parity of votes in a GE, which would still translate into the Tories on between 300-330 seats because of the coalition and how they're positioned in the marginals.
While MPs like Luciana Berger were getting bullied out of the Labour Party he chose to serve in the Shadow Cabinet to further his own career and put forward Corbyn as PM.
Only those who refused to serve under Corbyn should have been considered as possible Labour Party leaders. A Labour led by Yvette Cooper would be a credible threat right now.
The shocking incident was caught on CCTV in the early hours of Wednesday (17 February) morning.
The offenders could be seen urinating against the memorial on Stevenson Square whilst filming themselves, local councillors said.
Two men, both aged 22, have since been arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated criminal damage.
They remain in custody waiting to be quizzed by detectives.
https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk/news/greater-manchester-news/two-men-arrested-suspicion-urinating-19856772
https://twitter.com/epkaufm/status/1362363668290224129?s=20
In 2007, Brown variously led Cameron on "most capable" PM (I can't seem to find "best PM" but if anyone does, I would be curious to see as that's a direct comparison), by quite a long way, reaching
58-17 Brown-Cameron.
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/most-capable-prime-minister-trends
By 2009, that had reversed to
24-41 Brown-Cameron.
So what changed? In that time the Tories were plugging away at the idea Labour had caused the crisis - and Brown's crisis boost in 2007/2008 had evaporated.
We seem almost exactly the same thing today. I am going to argue that the speech today was the first sign of a strategy to pin the blame on the Tories. Not for the crisis itself but for being badly prepared for it. This is exactly what Cameron did.
This may prove to not work.
But 'bond' is just one of those financial terms like 'security' or 'gross profit' that no one normal really understands.
The prospect of giving the middle class a better savings rate (and making them feel good about it because they're investing in Britain) might prove popular.
After all - George Osborne did something fairly similar I think without the investing in Britain bit?
If he thought it was smart politics, it probably was.
When you look at the shadow cabinet that is a pretty frightening prospect.
Now contrast his behaviour when it comes to Priti Patel and the people she bullied.
Primary plus gcse/a-level cohorts