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.
I keep hearing that argument from PB Conservatives as they cast around for some angle to attack Starmer on. The argument appeals only to those who would never vote Labour in a million years.
Starmer took Corbyn down, something that I had just about despaired of happening. For that he deserves and gets great credit.
It is very obviously the case that Starmer's task would have been much harder if he had positioned himself as an outspoken critic of Corbyn from the start. The likes of Hilary Benn or Yvette Cooper would probably not have won in 2020, even against the awful Long-Bailey.
Starmer was astute enough to realise what was the best course to get rid of Corbyn, distancing himself from Corbyn within the tent without being overtly disloyal, and he followed it. People know that he did what was necessary, why should that attract any criticism?
He's no more a careerist than any politician, and probably a lot less than most considering the career he gave up to stand as a humble Labour MP in 2015. What he is though is a very astute politician.
I thought that today's speech was very good, timely, and likely to appeal to those whose votes are up for grabs. The spirit of 1945. Referencing Attlee. War bonds. The equivalent of "and now win the peace" and all that. All good themes and ones which can provide a focus that Starmer can define himself around.
Starmer took Corbyn down?
I think you'll find it was Boris that took Corbyn down. Starmer just clung close enough to Corbyn he could take the reins once he stepped down.
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
Isn't all this the biggest load of tosh since Eldorado? It reminds me of the one from Littlejohn a few days ago - "How long before BLM tear down statue of Captain Tom?"
Why is a respected academic aping Richard Littlejohn?
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 422,576 4,497 427,073 East Of England 47,349 516 47,865 London 56,382 629 57,011 Midlands 76,874 767 77,641 North East And Yorkshire 72,853 950 73,803 North West 54,382 373 54,755 South East 66,156 826 66,982 South West 46,724 432 47,156
The panic is being held in the Church Hall today. Could everyone who wants to run round like a headless chicken please remember to put all the folding chairs away afterwards? Please?
And it should go without saying: WIPE THEM DOWN AFTER USE.
1. Scrapping tertiary fees 2. Legalising cannabis 3. EFTA entry 4. Replacing council tax with land tax, tapered over time. 5. Strengthening protections for free speech and personal privacy 6. A way of addressing Google/Facebook monopolies 7. Experiments with UBI 8. Scrapping the TV license fee 9. An end to Covid restrictions 10. PR for local govt
That is worth expanding into a thread-header.
Good idea.
I want to know if @Gardenwalker really is 'like a teddy bear'.
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 422,576 4,497 427,073 East Of England 47,349 516 47,865 London 56,382 629 57,011 Midlands 76,874 767 77,641 North East And Yorkshire 72,853 950 73,803 North West 54,382 373 54,755 South East 66,156 826 66,982 South West 46,724 432 47,156
The panic is being held in the Church Hall today. Could everyone who wants to run round like a headless chicken please remember to put all the folding chairs away afterwards? Please?
LOLz. How long ago was it that would have been a Boom! number?
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 422,576 4,497 427,073 East Of England 47,349 516 47,865 London 56,382 629 57,011 Midlands 76,874 767 77,641 North East And Yorkshire 72,853 950 73,803 North West 54,382 373 54,755 South East 66,156 826 66,982 South West 46,724 432 47,156
The panic is being held in the Church Hall today. Could everyone who wants to run round like a headless chicken please remember to put all the folding chairs away afterwards? Please?
Might even hit 500k for the UK if NI has a strong day. Great news.
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.
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.
Legalisation of cannabis. Cut income tax for low paid by a lot. Devo max squared for Scotland, 6 counties and Wales. NHS covers all dental treatment. Universal broadband access. ( Make the free service shit and slow if too many people are offended by the poor having nice things. )
Income tax starts at £12,570 this year. How high do you move it?
Combined income taxes for the lowest paid are about 85p per pound at the minute.
To be clear that's for those who are receiving a significant proportion of their total income from universal credit.
The problem with that is I do wonder whether universal credit will be cut back in the need to find money post Covid.
Can you explain that number to a thickie like me please? Is this based on them losing UC if they work certain number of hours?
Jupiter's moons were, by convention, named after the Classical version's conquests, willing or not. There are now 53 and they got up to 35 names before they had to switch to his decedents...
Jupiter has 53 known moons, but probably tonnes more faint & small rocky satellites yet to be found. Look at the graph of discoveries versus time.
So we probably need someone with hundreds of sexual conquests for the naming.
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.
Legalisation of cannabis. Cut income tax for low paid by a lot. Devo max squared for Scotland, 6 counties and Wales. NHS covers all dental treatment. Universal broadband access. ( Make the free service shit and slow if too many people are offended by the poor having nice things. )
Income tax starts at £12,570 this year. How high do you move it?
Combined income taxes for the lowest paid are about 85p per pound at the minute.
To be clear that's for those who are receiving a significant proportion of their total income from universal credit.
The problem with that is I do wonder whether universal credit will be cut back in the need to find money post Covid.
Nobodies real tax rate should be 85%
Let alone the poorest.
Why not? The poor use the public services the most, they should contribute the most.
You think taxing the poorest 85% of every extra pound they earn encourages them to work more and contribute more?
They just need to believe in themselves harder and they'll get a decent job.
Have you seen the tables for today’s ComRes? I can’t seem to download them from their site
Yes, worked fine for me on a MacBook as a PDF download.
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.
I keep hearing that argument from PB Conservatives as they cast around for some angle to attack Starmer on. The argument appeals only to those who would never vote Labour in a million years.
Starmer took Corbyn down, something that I had just about despaired of happening. For that he deserves and gets great credit.
It is very obviously the case that Starmer's task would have been much harder if he had positioned himself as an outspoken critic of Corbyn from the start. The likes of Hilary Benn or Yvette Cooper would probably not have won in 2020, even against the awful Long-Bailey.
Starmer was astute enough to realise what was the best course to get rid of Corbyn, distancing himself from Corbyn within the tent without being overtly disloyal, and he followed it. People know that he did what was necessary, why should that attract any criticism?
He's no more a careerist than any politician, and probably a lot less than most considering the career he gave up to stand as a humble Labour MP in 2015. What he is though is a very astute politician.
I thought that today's speech was very good, timely, and likely to appeal to those whose votes are up for grabs. The spirit of 1945. Referencing Attlee. War bonds. The equivalent of "and now win the peace" and all that. All good themes and ones which can provide a focus that Starmer can define himself around.
A Tory majority of 80 took down Corbyn. If Boris had a won a majority of 4, Corbyn would be still hanging around waiting for his turn, Starmer or no.
Starmer's years in the Shadow Cabinet serving under an anti-semite goes to his character, that will be weighed at the next election. Where he will be found wanting on various levels, that being one.
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 422,576 4,497 427,073 East Of England 47,349 516 47,865 London 56,382 629 57,011 Midlands 76,874 767 77,641 North East And Yorkshire 72,853 950 73,803 North West 54,382 373 54,755 South East 66,156 826 66,982 South West 46,724 432 47,156
The panic is being held in the Church Hall today. Could everyone who wants to run round like a headless chicken please remember to put all the folding chairs away afterwards? Please?
Might even hit 500k for the UK if NI has a strong day. Great news.
It does seem ~500-550k is currently the ceiling of what we can expect, which given they managed 600k 3 weeks ago is a bit disappointing. That isn't knocking the government / jabbers, I think more there is clearly still issues with supply.
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.
Legalisation of cannabis. Cut income tax for low paid by a lot. Devo max squared for Scotland, 6 counties and Wales. NHS covers all dental treatment. Universal broadband access. ( Make the free service shit and slow if too many people are offended by the poor having nice things. )
Income tax starts at £12,570 this year. How high do you move it?
Combined income taxes for the lowest paid are about 85p per pound at the minute.
To be clear that's for those who are receiving a significant proportion of their total income from universal credit.
The problem with that is I do wonder whether universal credit will be cut back in the need to find money post Covid.
Can you explain that number to a thickie like me please? Is this based on them losing UC if they work certain number of hours?
Once you're past a (not especially high) threshold then for every £1 extra of take home pay you earn you received 73p less in UC.
So if you're past the NI/IC thresholds your wages get taxed NI/IC, then your net takehome pay gets 'taxed' a further 73% on top of that.
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?
Fair question and pleased to answer. I've always voted Labour but I'm part of what you'd call the new metro base rather than the old Red Wally (sic) base. I'm a metro progressive not a Red Wally. New metro base" means the group who have taken over as the base not that every individual member of it is a new Labour voter.
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 422,576 4,497 427,073 East Of England 47,349 516 47,865 London 56,382 629 57,011 Midlands 76,874 767 77,641 North East And Yorkshire 72,853 950 73,803 North West 54,382 373 54,755 South East 66,156 826 66,982 South West 46,724 432 47,156
The panic is being held in the Church Hall today. Could everyone who wants to run round like a headless chicken please remember to put all the folding chairs away afterwards? Please?
LOLz. How long ago was it that would have been a Boom! number?
I think there's now the distinct possibility that Sir Keir could do worse than Jezza in 2019. Will the vaccine rollout be Boris's Falkland's moment? Hitherto, many liked Boris and thought he was a bit of a lad; but now - by eradicating Covid almost single-handedly - Boris has soared to the heights of domestic mega-competent and world statesman. His base will be rock solid because he socked one to the dastardly EU, and I can't see him not picking up some extra votes along the way. Moreover, it's perfectly possibility that Sir Keir will lose much of the support Jezza drummed up amongst the idealistic youth. What to do?
Don’t know if he will do worse than Jezza in 2019 or not, but I think you’re pretty spot on with the scenario you paint
Agree as was your comment about him, as with others, competing against someone who is better at selling ideas to the British public than him.
I yield to no one in my estimation of Boris' ability and capability to be PM (very low). But you just can't help liking him on a personal level.
I have been at charity dinners where he was due to speak and, when it was rumoured that he had entered the building, there was a tangible buzz of excitement. Even, or rather especially from the old girls in pearls.
One of my best friends had a top job on the LIFFE floor by 23, retired at 29, millionaire by 30, women queuing up to date him, the widest circle of friends of anyone I knew, & a dozen or more lifelong close mates. I knew him as well as anyone and he could be thoughtless, selfish pig headed, and wind me up no end with his double standards, but he was charming, had bundles of charisma, a lovely smile, the greatest company, remembered everyone’s name and something about their life to talk about, and that’s what made him the successful, popular person he was. His faults were forgivable because you couldn’t help but love him. Sadly he also suffered with depression and took his own life last month, a devastating blow to my friends and I.
I think earnest types who play everything with a straight bat and live via spreadsheets can be left baffled by the popularity of those who dazzle despite their inconsistencies. We see it with Boris vs Sir Keir in no uncertain terms. I was a bit baffled at times by my friends success with women, in business, etc, I often thought ‘he’s blagging that, can’t they tell?’ but the truth was it didn’t really matter, some people are magnetic, and that’s what you need to be to get people to believe in you
Amusing in parts but it rather catches the ennui of the time. Ruth's heart is not in it, Nicola's heart is not in it, Baillie didn't even stand for the leadership, its all kind of tired and depressing and sad.
Have nominations closed in the SLAB leadership contest?
It's a real shame. Sarwar is an undoubted improvement presentationally - when voters are chosing between SNP and Labour, it helps not to be telling people what's what in deep Yorkshire tones. However, JB seems to be a real political talent.
Yes they have. It is only Sarwar and Lennon which is really no choice at all. JB is a throw back to the halcyon days when SLab actually had something to say.
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.
Legalisation of cannabis. Cut income tax for low paid by a lot. Devo max squared for Scotland, 6 counties and Wales. NHS covers all dental treatment. Universal broadband access. ( Make the free service shit and slow if too many people are offended by the poor having nice things. )
Income tax starts at £12,570 this year. How high do you move it?
Combined income taxes for the lowest paid are about 85p per pound at the minute.
To be clear that's for those who are receiving a significant proportion of their total income from universal credit.
The problem with that is I do wonder whether universal credit will be cut back in the need to find money post Covid.
Nobodies real tax rate should be 85%
Let alone the poorest.
Why not? The poor use the public services the most, they should contribute the most.
You think taxing the poorest 85% of every extra pound they earn encourages them to work more and contribute more?
They just need to believe in themselves harder and they'll get a decent job.
Have you seen the tables for today’s ComRes? I can’t seem to download them from their site
Yes, worked fine for me on a MacBook as a PDF download.
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
Isn't all this the biggest load of tosh since Eldorado? It reminds me of the one from Littlejohn a few days ago - "How long before BLM tear down statue of Captain Tom?"
Why is a respected academic aping Richard Littlejohn?
Hilariously the evidence being used to support Goodwin's latest victim moan is largely based on right leaning academics feeling 'uncomfortable'. Snowflakes.
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.
Legalisation of cannabis. Cut income tax for low paid by a lot. Devo max squared for Scotland, 6 counties and Wales. NHS covers all dental treatment. Universal broadband access. ( Make the free service shit and slow if too many people are offended by the poor having nice things. )
Income tax starts at £12,570 this year. How high do you move it?
Combined income taxes for the lowest paid are about 85p per pound at the minute.
To be clear that's for those who are receiving a significant proportion of their total income from universal credit.
The problem with that is I do wonder whether universal credit will be cut back in the need to find money post Covid.
Nobodies real tax rate should be 85%
Let alone the poorest.
Why not? The poor use the public services the most, they should contribute the most.
You think taxing the poorest 85% of every extra pound they earn encourages them to work more and contribute more?
They just need to believe in themselves harder and they'll get a decent job.
Have you seen the tables for today’s ComRes? I can’t seem to download them from their site
Yes, worked fine for me on a MacBook as a PDF download.
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?
Fair question and pleased to answer. I've always voted Labour but I'm part of what you'd call the new metro base rather than the old Red Wally (sic) base. I'm a metro progressive not a Red Wally. New metro base" means the group who have taken over as the base not that every individual member of it is a new Labour voter.
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.
Legalisation of cannabis. Cut income tax for low paid by a lot. Devo max squared for Scotland, 6 counties and Wales. NHS covers all dental treatment. Universal broadband access. ( Make the free service shit and slow if too many people are offended by the poor having nice things. )
Income tax starts at £12,570 this year. How high do you move it?
Combined income taxes for the lowest paid are about 85p per pound at the minute.
To be clear that's for those who are receiving a significant proportion of their total income from universal credit.
The problem with that is I do wonder whether universal credit will be cut back in the need to find money post Covid.
Nobodies real tax rate should be 85%
Let alone the poorest.
Why not? The poor use the public services the most, they should contribute the most.
You think taxing the poorest 85% of every extra pound they earn encourages them to work more and contribute more?
They just need to believe in themselves harder and they'll get a decent job.
Have you seen the tables for today’s ComRes? I can’t seem to download them from their site
Yes, worked fine for me on a MacBook as a PDF download.
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 422,576 4,497 427,073 East Of England 47,349 516 47,865 London 56,382 629 57,011 Midlands 76,874 767 77,641 North East And Yorkshire 72,853 950 73,803 North West 54,382 373 54,755 South East 66,156 826 66,982 South West 46,724 432 47,156
The panic is being held in the Church Hall today. Could everyone who wants to run round like a headless chicken please remember to put all the folding chairs away afterwards? Please?
And it should go without saying: WIPE THEM DOWN AFTER USE.
No real need. Fomites on surfaces are Covid's dog that didn't bark. Very little risk of infection from a chair.
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.
Legalisation of cannabis. Cut income tax for low paid by a lot. Devo max squared for Scotland, 6 counties and Wales. NHS covers all dental treatment. Universal broadband access. ( Make the free service shit and slow if too many people are offended by the poor having nice things. )
Income tax starts at £12,570 this year. How high do you move it?
Combined income taxes for the lowest paid are about 85p per pound at the minute.
To be clear that's for those who are receiving a significant proportion of their total income from universal credit.
The problem with that is I do wonder whether universal credit will be cut back in the need to find money post Covid.
Nobodies real tax rate should be 85%
Let alone the poorest.
Why not? The poor use the public services the most, they should contribute the most.
You think taxing the poorest 85% of every extra pound they earn encourages them to work more and contribute more?
They just need to believe in themselves harder and they'll get a decent job.
Have you seen the tables for today’s ComRes? I can’t seem to download them from their site
Yes, worked fine for me on a MacBook as a PDF download.
I think there's now the distinct possibility that Sir Keir could do worse than Jezza in 2019. Will the vaccine rollout be Boris's Falkland's moment? Hitherto, many liked Boris and thought he was a bit of a lad; but now - by eradicating Covid almost single-handedly - Boris has soared to the heights of domestic mega-competent and world statesman. His base will be rock solid because he socked one to the dastardly EU, and I can't see him not picking up some extra votes along the way. Moreover, it's perfectly possibility that Sir Keir will lose much of the support Jezza drummed up amongst the idealistic youth. What to do?
"Boris... by eradicating Covid almost single-handedly"
WTF??
I was referring to the perception rather than the reality. But the Falklands analogy is apposite: Maggie was credited with 'winning' the Falklands conflict, but it was her poor judgement that allowed the invasion in the first place and the situation was only rectified when others stepped in to sort out her mess. But she still reaped the political dividends - much to her opponents' immense irritation.
I thought the problem was not Maggie but her FCO going off on manoeuvres and giving the impression the UK didn't care about the islands?
Lord Carrington argued through thick and thin that we shouldn't give the Argies any impression that we were losing interest in the Falklands. Alas Maggie and John Nitt went ahead with their defence cuts, which was the catalyst.
Carrington may have been arguing that but those in his department - particularly the ministers in charge incliuding Nicholas Ridley - gave exactly the opposite impression, including pressing the Islanders themselves to accept Argentine involvement and making it clear in Parliamentary statements that the UK would not continue to support the Islands indefinitely and that they thought ceding sovereignty was the only solution. It sent a far greater message to Argentina than any defence cuts.
1. Scrapping tertiary fees 2. Legalising cannabis 3. EFTA entry 4. Replacing council tax with land tax, tapered over time. 5. Strengthening protections for free speech and personal privacy 6. A way of addressing Google/Facebook monopolies 7. Experiments with UBI 8. Scrapping the TV license fee 9. An end to Covid restrictions 10. PR for local govt
An interesting LD prospectus. Needs some proposals for raising significant taxes to pay for it.
1 - Could cost £5bn a year. 2 - Hope that psychosis does not increase. Would tax on this pay for 1 and 8? 3 - Pros and cons to debate. Potentially might help LDs a little with the 52% they defined as thick racists, whilst keeping their FBPE tendency on board. 4 - Yes - though we have a fully worked out set of proposals from some time ago for adjusting Council Tax / Stamp Duty which are far better. IMO Land Tax is based far too heavily on future usage class guesses by bureaucrats, and the last set of published proposals had not thought through consequences in any serious way. 5 - Yes. 6 - Yes if not just a bandwagon a la Australia. 7 - Very questionable / shot in the dark. I prefer Experiments with Mice by Johnny Dankworth. 8 - Yes, but how to raise £4bn a year for the BBC? 9 - Yes 10 - Would this be combined with any changes? Tories currently planning to throw it all in the air again afaics.
Tax cannabis. Tax mobile / broadband connections (to pay for the BBC). Council > Land tax would need to be cost neutral, at least over time.
I am only suggesting experimenting with UBI. I’d pick a few smaller towns: say, Derry, Worcester and Dover, and see what happens.
I think there's now the distinct possibility that Sir Keir could do worse than Jezza in 2019. Will the vaccine rollout be Boris's Falkland's moment? Hitherto, many liked Boris and thought he was a bit of a lad; but now - by eradicating Covid almost single-handedly - Boris has soared to the heights of domestic mega-competent and world statesman. His base will be rock solid because he socked one to the dastardly EU, and I can't see him not picking up some extra votes along the way. Moreover, it's perfectly possibility that Sir Keir will lose much of the support Jezza drummed up amongst the idealistic youth. What to do?
"Boris... by eradicating Covid almost single-handedly"
WTF??
I was referring to the perception rather than the reality. But the Falklands analogy is apposite: Maggie was credited with 'winning' the Falklands conflict, but it was her poor judgement that allowed the invasion in the first place and the situation was only rectified when others stepped in to sort out her mess. But she still reaped the political dividends - much to her opponents' immense irritation.
I thought the problem was not Maggie but her FCO going off on manoeuvres and giving the impression the UK didn't care about the islands?
It was more the fact that Thatcher endorsed the decision of John Nott and the MOD to announce in 1981 the withdrawal of HMS Endurance from the South Atlantic that made the Argentinians think the UK didn't want to protect the Falklands and South Georgia.
Nope that was Ridley and others at the FCO making it clear that they regarded the islands as a nuisance and were happy to do a deal with Argentina.
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.
Legalisation of cannabis. Cut income tax for low paid by a lot. Devo max squared for Scotland, 6 counties and Wales. NHS covers all dental treatment. Universal broadband access. ( Make the free service shit and slow if too many people are offended by the poor having nice things. )
Income tax starts at £12,570 this year. How high do you move it?
Combined income taxes for the lowest paid are about 85p per pound at the minute.
To be clear that's for those who are receiving a significant proportion of their total income from universal credit.
The problem with that is I do wonder whether universal credit will be cut back in the need to find money post Covid.
Can you explain that number to a thickie like me please? Is this based on them losing UC if they work certain number of hours?
Once you're past a (not especially high) threshold then for every £1 extra of take home pay you earn you received 73p less in UC.
So if you're past the NI/IC thresholds your wages get taxed NI/IC, then your net takehome pay gets 'taxed' a further 73% on top of that.
So a disincentive to working more (similar but different to reaching the 40% tax bracket?)
Well, I've done my duty, and I've read Sir Keir's speech. All of it (well, except the bits where my eyes glazed over and I started nodding off, natch).
It's rather repetitive, and too focused on bashing the government, rather than on what he needs to address, which is what Labour would do differently. The big ideas seem to be extending furlough and the UC uplift, and err, something incoherent about bonds, which seems to be a bung to wealthy savers. Very odd, especially since I'd hazard a guess that Rishi has already thought of the first two at least.
Is that really the best he can come up with? And nothing significant about improving Boris' disastrous Brexit deal, or NI, or Scotland, or social care (other than criticising the Tories), or healthcare, or education. I was still waiting to get to the meat of the speech when it abruptly ended, as though someone had accidentally erased the substantive bit.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
I think there's now the distinct possibility that Sir Keir could do worse than Jezza in 2019. Will the vaccine rollout be Boris's Falkland's moment? Hitherto, many liked Boris and thought he was a bit of a lad; but now - by eradicating Covid almost single-handedly - Boris has soared to the heights of domestic mega-competent and world statesman. His base will be rock solid because he socked one to the dastardly EU, and I can't see him not picking up some extra votes along the way. Moreover, it's perfectly possibility that Sir Keir will lose much of the support Jezza drummed up amongst the idealistic youth. What to do?
Don’t know if he will do worse than Jezza in 2019 or not, but I think you’re pretty spot on with the scenario you paint
Agree as was your comment about him, as with others, competing against someone who is better at selling ideas to the British public than him.
I yield to no one in my estimation of Boris' ability and capability to be PM (very low). But you just can't help liking him on a personal level.
I have been at charity dinners where he was due to speak and, when it was rumoured that he had entered the building, there was a tangible buzz of excitement. Even, or rather especially from the old girls in pearls.
One of my best friends had a top job on the LIFFE floor by 23, retired at 29, millionaire by 30, women queuing up to date him, the widest circle of friends of anyone I knew, & a dozen or more lifelong close mates. I knew him as well as anyone and he could be thoughtless, selfish pig headed, and wind me up no end with his double standards, but he was charming, had bundles of charisma, a lovely smile, the greatest company, remembered everyone’s name and something about their life to talk about, and that’s what made him the successful, popular person he was. His faults were forgivable because you couldn’t help but love him. Sadly he also suffered with depression and took his own life last month, a devastating blow to my friends and I.
I think earnest types who play everything with a straight bat and live via spreadsheets can be left baffled by the popularity of those who dazzle despite their inconsistencies. We see it with Boris vs Sir Keir in no uncertain terms. I was a bit baffled at times by my friends success with women, in business, etc, I often thought ‘he’s blagging that, can’t they tell?’ but the truth was it didn’t really matter, some people are magnetic, and that’s what you need to be to get people to believe in you
Sorry to hear about your friend, isam. It sounds like he was a real star, but of course that's no protection against the usual human frailties.
“Glasgow’s miles better”, was the ‘80s tourist board campaign slogan.
No surprises.
I remember, with my wife, meeting some random chap at the Clutha Vaults and before we knew it were were on a drunken tour of folk music joints and secret pool halls.
This is incredibly odd behaviour for me (and my wife)
You deal with a threat by having the power to overcome it, not by collywobbling all the time. It is rather silly to see portentous warnings about 'global threats' on PB, but any suggestion of what we can do amounting to little more than - nothing unless America is doing it and tells us to help.
The lesson of history tells us we need to build up the Navy. I am not experienced in defence matters, but I would suggest that small carriers and crafts capable of moving fast and mounting effective, quick operations would be better than vast carriers that we can't afford the aircraft for. A truly independent and usable nuclear capability would also be a plus.
IANAE either but I think all militaries should be reviewing the Azerbaijan conflict very carefully. Cheap unmanned drones turned out to be key. I suspect that is the future of warfare with on the ground human involvement rapidly becoming less significant and less effective. We should probably be investing accordingly.
Yes, definitely, those too.
And speaking of un-manned defence, I also don't see why we can't bury torpedo tubes under the sea all around the UK coastline. Far more flexible and dangerous than a one-chance strategic nuke that everybody knows we'd never fire.
Not a new idea - the remains of late Victorian sites for wire-guided powered torpedoes are visible in various places such as Fort Victoria near Yarmouth on IoW.
Think how many you would need to cover the coastline. Too short ranged, too slow at longer ranges unless you are using way-out stuff like rockets or what are effectively expensive slf-guided mini-subs - ie underwater drones (but unmanned). Also to some extent vulnerable to passive and active defences nowadays. And you need a sensor system to identify and track targets. And persons controlling them.
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.
Legalisation of cannabis. Cut income tax for low paid by a lot. Devo max squared for Scotland, 6 counties and Wales. NHS covers all dental treatment. Universal broadband access. ( Make the free service shit and slow if too many people are offended by the poor having nice things. )
Income tax starts at £12,570 this year. How high do you move it?
Combined income taxes for the lowest paid are about 85p per pound at the minute.
To be clear that's for those who are receiving a significant proportion of their total income from universal credit.
The problem with that is I do wonder whether universal credit will be cut back in the need to find money post Covid.
Can you explain that number to a thickie like me please? Is this based on them losing UC if they work certain number of hours?
Once you're past a (not especially high) threshold then for every £1 extra of take home pay you earn you received 73p less in UC.
So if you're past the NI/IC thresholds your wages get taxed NI/IC, then your net takehome pay gets 'taxed' a further 73% on top of that.
So a disincentive to working more (similar but different to reaching the 40% tax bracket?)
Precisely. Hence a major attitude for many years for many people is "I'm not allowed to work more than 16 hours".
Why bother working past 16 hours if you're taking home £1 per hour past that point?
Well, I've done my duty, and I've read Sir Keir's speech. All of it (well, except the bits where my eyes glazed over and I started nodding off, natch).
It's rather repetitive, and too focused on bashing the government, rather than on what he needs to address, which is what Labour would do differently. The big ideas seem to be extending furlough and the UC uplift, and err, something incoherent about bonds, which seems to be a bung to wealthy savers. Very odd, especially since I'd hazard a guess that Rishi has already thought of the first two at least.
Is that really the best he can come up with? And nothing significant about improving Boris' disastrous Brexit deal, or NI, or Scotland, or social care (other than criticising the Tories), or healthcare, or education. I was still waiting to get to the meat of the speech when it abruptly ended, as though someone had accidentally erased the substantive bit.
1. Scrapping tertiary fees 2. Legalising cannabis 3. EFTA entry 4. Replacing council tax with land tax, tapered over time. 5. Strengthening protections for free speech and personal privacy 6. A way of addressing Google/Facebook monopolies 7. Experiments with UBI 8. Scrapping the TV license fee 9. An end to Covid restrictions 10. PR for local govt
An interesting LD prospectus. Needs some proposals for raising significant taxes to pay for it.
1 - Could cost £5bn a year. 2 - Hope that psychosis does not increase. Would tax on this pay for 1 and 8? 3 - Pros and cons to debate. Potentially might help LDs a little with the 52% they defined as thick racists, whilst keeping their FBPE tendency on board. 4 - Yes - though we have a fully worked out set of proposals from some time ago for adjusting Council Tax / Stamp Duty which are far better. IMO Land Tax is based far too heavily on future usage class guesses by bureaucrats, and the last set of published proposals had not thought through consequences in any serious way. 5 - Yes. 6 - Yes if not just a bandwagon a la Australia. 7 - Very questionable / shot in the dark. I prefer Experiments with Mice by Johnny Dankworth. 8 - Yes, but how to raise £4bn a year for the BBC? 9 - Yes 10 - Would this be combined with any changes? Tories currently planning to throw it all in the air again afaics.
Well that lot to me adds up to a broadly attractive prospectus. (The slightly sore point for me might be EFTA - but four years ago, that was my preferred outcome - so I am probably convinceable.) But it strikes me as the sort of thing the Lib Dems predecessors from a previous generation might have advocated, rather than anything the current generation might advocate. In particular, 5 and 9 - which are the two I would be keenest on - seem to be the opposite to the way Lib Dems are currently going. And as regards 3 I can't see the Lib Dems going for anything short of rejoin.
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 422,576 4,497 427,073 East Of England 47,349 516 47,865 London 56,382 629 57,011 Midlands 76,874 767 77,641 North East And Yorkshire 72,853 950 73,803 North West 54,382 373 54,755 South East 66,156 826 66,982 South West 46,724 432 47,156
The panic is being held in the Church Hall today. Could everyone who wants to run round like a headless chicken please remember to put all the folding chairs away afterwards? Please?
Who are you aiming this panicking stuff at? AFAIK nobody on here has been panicking, some have pointed out W-o-W falls from time to time.
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 422,576 4,497 427,073 East Of England 47,349 516 47,865 London 56,382 629 57,011 Midlands 76,874 767 77,641 North East And Yorkshire 72,853 950 73,803 North West 54,382 373 54,755 South East 66,156 826 66,982 South West 46,724 432 47,156
The panic is being held in the Church Hall today. Could everyone who wants to run round like a headless chicken please remember to put all the folding chairs away afterwards? Please?
Might even hit 500k for the UK if NI has a strong day. Great news.
It does seem ~500-550k is currently the ceiling of what we can expect, which given they managed 600k 3 weeks ago is a bit disappointing. That isn't knocking the government / jabbers, I think more there is clearly still issues with supply.
It's up 60k week on week but clearly supply is an issue - though perhaps not as much as it was a week or two ago. If we can hit 3m a week until Easter that'll get Groups 5-9 done (17 million). Its only in April that capacity really needs to be ramped up to ensure 2nd doses don't lead to a stangnation of new 1st doses.
“Glasgow’s miles better”, was the ‘80s tourist board campaign slogan.
No surprises.
I remember, with my wife, meeting some random chap at the Clutha Vaults and before we knew it were were on a drunken tour of folk music joints and secret pool halls.
This is incredibly odd behaviour for me (and my wife)
When I was at University we countered the slogan with "Aberdeen's miles further"
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.
Indeed. Wilson managed it, though.
Every labour leader up to and including Blair could draw on the vast well of sanity of the mass manufacturing working class. Car workers, railwaymen, dockers, miners, engineering unions etc.
No statue topplers or reparations proposers there.
As a bit of an extensive but useful digression there, Labour has actually been a coalition of the metropolitan and the working class since the 1890s. The trade unionist, art historian and proto-feminist Lady Emilia Dilke was one of its first members.
In the 1960s and 1970s Labour wouldn't and couldn't have won without a metropolitan-heartland coalition. Wilson's very public embrace of The Beatles was all about that.
There are also distinctive modern identity conflicts that Starmer has to deal with too , I agree, but he may be up to the that.
If he really wanted to win, Starmer would go to the university lecturers, senior diversity officers, hospital administrators, human rights lawyers, charity bosses, top trade unionists, commentariat journalists etc.etc.etc. who are his bedrock and say
'you f8ckers have done outrageously well relatively since lockdown and I am coming to collect via taxes and salary cuts. The reason is that poor working class people in the private sector have had a horrible time. Now suck it up b8tches, because its not like you are going to be voting for Johnson, is it.''
He could win that way, big time.
As an employment lawyer, one only a step removed from a human rights lawyer (of whom there are vanishingly few - it's not a standalone area in which it is possible to make any money - you may be meaning immigration and criminal lawyers) I'd love to know why you think we have done "outrageously well"?
Well, I've done my duty, and I've read Sir Keir's speech. All of it (well, except the bits where my eyes glazed over and I started nodding off, natch).
It's rather repetitive, and too focused on bashing the government, rather than on what he needs to address, which is what Labour would do differently. The big ideas seem to be extending furlough and the UC uplift, and err, something incoherent about bonds, which seems to be a bung to wealthy savers. Very odd, especially since I'd hazard a guess that Rishi has already thought of the first two at least.
Is that really the best he can come up with? And nothing significant about improving Boris' disastrous Brexit deal, or NI, or Scotland, or social care (other than criticising the Tories), or healthcare, or education. I was still waiting to get to the meat of the speech when it abruptly ended, as though someone had accidentally erased the substantive bit.
How can starmer talk about education when he has stood by and watched school closures widen the big gap between the middle classes and the poor working classes? Indeed he campaigned for more of this and for it to go on longer.
Starmer is complicit in protecting and enhancing the already well feathered nest of a patrician middle class of which he is a card carrying member. Johnson also courts this class because it screeches loudest and longest whenever things it doesn't like happen.
The person to tell this class to go f8ck itself longest and loudest gets the keys to Britain.
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.
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.
Cameron served IDS, preparing him for PMQs and Howard, as Shadow Education Secretary, on your logic he should never have been considered as party leader either.
If you openly oppose the incumbent party leader and refuse to even serve under them you almost never wear the crown, even if that party leader loses, as you look disloyal.
Labour would be winning over no extra Tory voters under Cooper than under Starmer and indeed might be losing even more voters to the Greens
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.
Legalisation of cannabis. Cut income tax for low paid by a lot. Devo max squared for Scotland, 6 counties and Wales. NHS covers all dental treatment. Universal broadband access. ( Make the free service shit and slow if too many people are offended by the poor having nice things. )
Income tax starts at £12,570 this year. How high do you move it?
Combined income taxes for the lowest paid are about 85p per pound at the minute.
To be clear that's for those who are receiving a significant proportion of their total income from universal credit.
The problem with that is I do wonder whether universal credit will be cut back in the need to find money post Covid.
Can you explain that number to a thickie like me please? Is this based on them losing UC if they work certain number of hours?
Once you're past a (not especially high) threshold then for every £1 extra of take home pay you earn you received 73p less in UC.
So if you're past the NI/IC thresholds your wages get taxed NI/IC, then your net takehome pay gets 'taxed' a further 73% on top of that.
So a disincentive to working more (similar but different to reaching the 40% tax bracket?)
Precisely. Hence a major attitude for many years for many people is "I'm not allowed to work more than 16 hours".
Why bother working past 16 hours if you're taking home £1 per hour past that point?
The 16 hours rule was much worse than that - working 17 hours meant you lost all your benefits, which could be £100 or more per week. It was often not worth even working 30 hours, because you’d take home less than working 16h.
That was one of many anomalies that UC addressed. Yes, the withdrawal rate is high, but it’s infinitely better than what went before.
One lady who worked for me had to cut her hours from 25 to 16, because her husband lost his job, and if she was working 25h he couldn’t claim unemployment and income support. That sort of madness was encouraged by the system.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
1. Scrapping tertiary fees 2. Legalising cannabis 3. EFTA entry 4. Replacing council tax with land tax, tapered over time. 5. Strengthening protections for free speech and personal privacy 6. A way of addressing Google/Facebook monopolies 7. Experiments with UBI 8. Scrapping the TV license fee 9. An end to Covid restrictions 10. PR for local govt
An interesting LD prospectus. Needs some proposals for raising significant taxes to pay for it.
1 - Could cost £5bn a year. 2 - Hope that psychosis does not increase. Would tax on this pay for 1 and 8? 3 - Pros and cons to debate. Potentially might help LDs a little with the 52% they defined as thick racists, whilst keeping their FBPE tendency on board. 4 - Yes - though we have a fully worked out set of proposals from some time ago for adjusting Council Tax / Stamp Duty which are far better. IMO Land Tax is based far too heavily on future usage class guesses by bureaucrats, and the last set of published proposals had not thought through consequences in any serious way. 5 - Yes. 6 - Yes if not just a bandwagon a la Australia. 7 - Very questionable / shot in the dark. I prefer Experiments with Mice by Johnny Dankworth. 8 - Yes, but how to raise £4bn a year for the BBC? 9 - Yes 10 - Would this be combined with any changes? Tories currently planning to throw it all in the air again afaics.
Well that lot to me adds up to a broadly attractive prospectus. (The slightly sore point for me might be EFTA - but four years ago, that was my preferred outcome - so I am probably convinceable.) But it strikes me as the sort of thing the Lib Dems predecessors from a previous generation might have advocated, rather than anything the current generation might advocate. In particular, 5 and 9 - which are the two I would be keenest on - seem to be the opposite to the way Lib Dems are currently going. And as regards 3 I can't see the Lib Dems going for anything short of rejoin.
I would also be happy to see the Lib Dems taking a more significant anti-monopolist line on issues such as Big Tech, but that would require to a certain extent moving away from the Orange Book political space, which I'm not sure the current Lib Dems want to do just as yet.
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?
Fair question and pleased to answer. I've always voted Labour but I'm part of what you'd call the new metro base rather than the old Red Wally (sic) base. I'm a metro progressive not a Red Wally. New metro base" means the group who have taken over as the base not that every individual member of it is a new Labour voter.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
Region of Residence 1st dose 2nd dose Cumulative Total Doses to Date Total 422,576 4,497 427,073 East Of England 47,349 516 47,865 London 56,382 629 57,011 Midlands 76,874 767 77,641 North East And Yorkshire 72,853 950 73,803 North West 54,382 373 54,755 South East 66,156 826 66,982 South West 46,724 432 47,156
The panic is being held in the Church Hall today. Could everyone who wants to run round like a headless chicken please remember to put all the folding chairs away afterwards? Please?
Who are you aiming this panicking stuff at? AFAIK nobody on here has been panicking, some have pointed out W-o-W falls from time to time.
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?
Fair question and pleased to answer. I've always voted Labour but I'm part of what you'd call the new metro base rather than the old Red Wally (sic) base. I'm a metro progressive not a Red Wally. New metro base" means the group who have taken over as the base not that every individual member of it is a new Labour voter.
Vaccination numbers 108% of last week's totals at the same point.
That's a bit of a plateau. In fairness its a fairly high plateau but still. As we move into more mobile age groups we really should be doing a little better.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
Thatcher?
I was going to say John Major's cones hotline ;-)
Imagine if the story of him and Edwina had come out at the time. Cones Hotline would have become a footnote in history...
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.
Indeed. Wilson managed it, though.
Every labour leader up to and including Blair could draw on the vast well of sanity of the mass manufacturing working class. Car workers, railwaymen, dockers, miners, engineering unions etc.
No statue topplers or reparations proposers there.
As a bit of an extensive but useful digression there, Labour has actually been a coalition of the metropolitan and the working class since the 1890s. The trade unionist, art historian and proto-feminist Lady Emilia Dilke was one of its first members.
In the 1960s and 1970s Labour wouldn't and couldn't have won without a metropolitan-heartland coalition. Wilson's very public embrace of The Beatles was all about that.
There are also distinctive modern identity conflicts that Starmer has to deal with too , I agree, but he may be up to the that.
If he really wanted to win, Starmer would go to the university lecturers, senior diversity officers, hospital administrators, human rights lawyers, charity bosses, top trade unionists, commentariat journalists etc.etc.etc. who are his bedrock and say
'you f8ckers have done outrageously well relatively since lockdown and I am coming to collect via taxes and salary cuts. The reason is that poor working class people in the private sector have had a horrible time. Now suck it up b8tches, because its not like you are going to be voting for Johnson, is it.''
He could win that way, big time.
As an employment lawyer, one only a step removed from a human rights lawyer (of whom there are vanishingly few - it's not a standalone area in which it is possible to make any money - you may be meaning immigration and criminal lawyers) I'd love to know why you think we have done "outrageously well"?
YOu are missing the word 'relatively' I am afraid.
Many in the private sector have lost their jobs or are managing on 80% of what they earned in the past for now, only to possibly be told there is no job when the scheme runs out. Often these workers were pretty moderately paid when they were on 100%, and they also have to factor in childcare because schools are closed. Rent arrears are soaring and eviction holidays won't last forever. Some industries (hospitality, Weddings, catering, events) will take years to recover fully. There are millions of these workers.
I appreciate that there may be some sweeping classifications in what I wrote but when you are talking about blocs of voters they can be difficult to avoid.
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
Isn't all this the biggest load of tosh since Eldorado? It reminds me of the one from Littlejohn a few days ago - "How long before BLM tear down statue of Captain Tom?"
I don't think it is.
I see two parts to this - one is associated with student politics, as discussed a little yesterday. However even that has a serious side to it - a few years ago when the NUS had an institutionally racist period (eg refusing to allow Jewish Students to organise as a minority, whilst permitting it for others), it gave implicit encouragement to various kinds of abuse.
Obvs you have the silly stuff - banning the Daily Mail from shops and so, but to pretend it is all silly stuff is itself absurd. That is where I think Alistair got it wholly wrong yesterday.
The other is a culture from the top that seems to me to be a lack of a moral amongst university managements. I'd point for example to relatively uncritical cave-ins to 'anti-colonialist' campaigners - see the initial response to "Rhodes Must Go" for an example.
Also this kind of thing, where York Uni withdrew support for an "international mens' day event" discussing, amongst other things, rates of male suicide - because some feminists (almost all activists not students) had written to a local newspaper. They should have been capable of holding the ring on this, rather than just caving in to whatever the latest lot of campaigners say.
You deal with a threat by having the power to overcome it, not by collywobbling all the time. It is rather silly to see portentous warnings about 'global threats' on PB, but any suggestion of what we can do amounting to little more than - nothing unless America is doing it and tells us to help.
The lesson of history tells us we need to build up the Navy. I am not experienced in defence matters, but I would suggest that small carriers and crafts capable of moving fast and mounting effective, quick operations would be better than vast carriers that we can't afford the aircraft for. A truly independent and usable nuclear capability would also be a plus.
IANAE either but I think all militaries should be reviewing the Azerbaijan conflict very carefully. Cheap unmanned drones turned out to be key. I suspect that is the future of warfare with on the ground human involvement rapidly becoming less significant and less effective. We should probably be investing accordingly.
Yes, definitely, those too.
And speaking of un-manned defence, I also don't see why we can't bury torpedo tubes under the sea all around the UK coastline. Far more flexible and dangerous than a one-chance strategic nuke that everybody knows we'd never fire.
Not a new idea - the remains of late Victorian sites for wire-guided powered torpedoes are visible in various places such as Fort Victoria near Yarmouth on IoW.
Think how many you would need to cover the coastline. Too short ranged, too slow at longer ranges unless you are using way-out stuff like rockets or what are effectively expensive slf-guided mini-subs - ie underwater drones (but unmanned). Also to some extent vulnerable to passive and active defences nowadays. And you need a sensor system to identify and track targets. And persons controlling them.
What are you planning to torpedo?
The Germans are quite unlikely to re-float the Blucher, declare war and send her cruising up the Thames.....
Aside from that, no conceivable attack on the UK involves getting within 10 miles of the coast, on or below the water.
Cruise missiles are the first thing that comes to mind....
As Hermann Khan observed, the enemy has a nasty habit of observing what your capabilities are and doing something else.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
Thatcher?
I was going to say John Major's cones hotline ;-)
Imagine if the story of him and Edwina had come out at the time. Cones Hotline would have become a footnote in history...
There would certainly have been a diversion or two.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
Thatcher?
I was going to say John Major's cones hotline ;-)
Imagine if the story of him and Edwina had come out at the time. Cones Hotline would have become a footnote in history...
If that story had come out at the time, it probably would have led to the PM being given the metaphorical whisky and revolver from the men in grey suits.
Jupiter's moons were, by convention, named after the Classical version's conquests, willing or not. There are now 53 and they got up to 35 names before they had to switch to his decedents...
Jupiter has 53 known moons, but probably tonnes more faint & small rocky satellites yet to be found. Look at the graph of discoveries versus time.
So we probably need someone with hundreds of sexual conquests for the naming.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
Thatcher?
I was going to say John Major's cones hotline ;-)
Imagine if the story of him and Edwina had come out at the time. Cones Hotline would have become a footnote in history...
If that story had come out at the time, it probably would have led to the PM being given the metaphorical whisky and revolver from the men in grey suits.
Yes. It would have removed the one minor asset he had by the finish - that people felt sorry for him.
You deal with a threat by having the power to overcome it, not by collywobbling all the time. It is rather silly to see portentous warnings about 'global threats' on PB, but any suggestion of what we can do amounting to little more than - nothing unless America is doing it and tells us to help.
The lesson of history tells us we need to build up the Navy. I am not experienced in defence matters, but I would suggest that small carriers and crafts capable of moving fast and mounting effective, quick operations would be better than vast carriers that we can't afford the aircraft for. A truly independent and usable nuclear capability would also be a plus.
IANAE either but I think all militaries should be reviewing the Azerbaijan conflict very carefully. Cheap unmanned drones turned out to be key. I suspect that is the future of warfare with on the ground human involvement rapidly becoming less significant and less effective. We should probably be investing accordingly.
Yes, definitely, those too.
And speaking of un-manned defence, I also don't see why we can't bury torpedo tubes under the sea all around the UK coastline. Far more flexible and dangerous than a one-chance strategic nuke that everybody knows we'd never fire.
Not a new idea - the remains of late Victorian sites for wire-guided powered torpedoes are visible in various places such as Fort Victoria near Yarmouth on IoW.
Think how many you would need to cover the coastline. Too short ranged, too slow at longer ranges unless you are using way-out stuff like rockets or what are effectively expensive slf-guided mini-subs - ie underwater drones (but unmanned). Also to some extent vulnerable to passive and active defences nowadays. And you need a sensor system to identify and track targets. And persons controlling them.
I wouldn't see a need to 'cover' the coastline, as I would actually envisage these as a deterrent - a weapon of attack not really defence. Just placed at strategical points to give the widest range of targets. They would need to be GPS (or similar) controlled.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
Thatcher?
I was going to say John Major's cones hotline ;-)
Imagine if the story of him and Edwina had come out at the time. Cones Hotline would have become a footnote in history...
If that story had come out at the time, it probably would have led to the PM being given the metaphorical whisky and revolver from the men in grey suits.
Had he known about it, I imagine Norman Lamont would have leaked that story in revenge!
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.
Yep, this is a mood thing as much as anything. After the nightmare of Covid we rebuild together and we fund it together. All with a stake. All rooting for each other. The feel tone is "togetherness" and - this is key - of the optimistic not the "in adversity" variety. This is genius. Potentially. CitBond needs to be BIG and we need a stream of similarly themed policies between now and 2024. One question for each new one. "Does this fit our TOGETHER theme?" If not, it's out. But massive caveat: Save the best so the Cons don't steal. They are prone to this since they can't think for themselves
So your answer to everything is communitarianism?
And you think that's genius?
Its a thought. Not sure how its any different to Corbynism though, except there's less banging on about Jews.
Not the answer to everything. Of course not. But Labour need a strong and coherent vision to win the next election and I see the beginnings of one forming along the lines I sketched out. Collectivism. Optimism. Can Do. Togetherness. I can see this beating the sort of tawdry National Populism that the Cons look like being reduced to.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
Thatcher?
I was going to say John Major's cones hotline ;-)
Imagine if the story of him and Edwina had come out at the time. Cones Hotline would have become a footnote in history...
Imagine if it had been revealed that the encounter between him and Edwina had involved a traffic cone...
More surge testing is happening in England after another discovery of the South African Covid-19 variant.
The mutation has been found in Leeds, so the Department of Health has announced extra testing and genomic sequencing to track down any other cases and control the spread.
It is the latest area of the country to have targeted testing set up.
People in the LS8 postcode, including parts of Harehills and the area just north of Easterly Road where the variant was found, are being "strongly encouraged" to take a test when offered, whether or not they have symptoms.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
Thatcher?
I was going to say John Major's cones hotline ;-)
Imagine if the story of him and Edwina had come out at the time. Cones Hotline would have become a footnote in history...
Imagine if it had been revealed that the encounter between him and Edwina involved a traffic cone...
Well she did recently talk about pegging....perhaps that is what she likes to use.
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.
Vaccination numbers 108% of last week's totals at the same point.
That's a bit of a plateau. In fairness its a fairly high plateau but still. As we move into more mobile age groups we really should be doing a little better.
No, we need to start thinking about how to handle capacity for both doses needing to be given simultaneously and ensuring that neither programme slows down in the interim.
You deal with a threat by having the power to overcome it, not by collywobbling all the time. It is rather silly to see portentous warnings about 'global threats' on PB, but any suggestion of what we can do amounting to little more than - nothing unless America is doing it and tells us to help.
The lesson of history tells us we need to build up the Navy. I am not experienced in defence matters, but I would suggest that small carriers and crafts capable of moving fast and mounting effective, quick operations would be better than vast carriers that we can't afford the aircraft for. A truly independent and usable nuclear capability would also be a plus.
IANAE either but I think all militaries should be reviewing the Azerbaijan conflict very carefully. Cheap unmanned drones turned out to be key. I suspect that is the future of warfare with on the ground human involvement rapidly becoming less significant and less effective. We should probably be investing accordingly.
Yes, definitely, those too.
And speaking of un-manned defence, I also don't see why we can't bury torpedo tubes under the sea all around the UK coastline. Far more flexible and dangerous than a one-chance strategic nuke that everybody knows we'd never fire.
Not a new idea - the remains of late Victorian sites for wire-guided powered torpedoes are visible in various places such as Fort Victoria near Yarmouth on IoW.
Think how many you would need to cover the coastline. Too short ranged, too slow at longer ranges unless you are using way-out stuff like rockets or what are effectively expensive slf-guided mini-subs - ie underwater drones (but unmanned). Also to some extent vulnerable to passive and active defences nowadays. And you need a sensor system to identify and track targets. And persons controlling them.
What are you planning to torpedo?
The Germans are quite unlikely to re-float the Blucher, declare war and send her cruising up the Thames.....
Aside from that, no conceivable attack on the UK involves getting within 10 miles of the coast, on or below the water.
Cruise missiles are the first thing that comes to mind....
As Hermann Khan observed, the enemy has a nasty habit of observing what your capabilities are and doing something else.
Coastal cities and defence installations of hostile countries.
When was the last time any politician really nailed some truly radical new policy ideas, that didn't immediately explode on impact with even the most cursory bit of poking?
Thatcher?
I was going to say John Major's cones hotline ;-)
Imagine if the story of him and Edwina had come out at the time. Cones Hotline would have become a footnote in history...
Imagine if it had been revealed that the encounter between him and Edwina had involved a traffic cone...
That’s a mental image I could easily have lived a full and happy life without ever having.
Vaccination numbers 108% of last week's totals at the same point.
That's a bit of a plateau. In fairness its a fairly high plateau but still. As we move into more mobile age groups we really should be doing a little better.
No, we need to start thinking about how to handle capacity for both doses needing to be given simultaneously and ensuring that neither programme slows down in the interim.
Exactly, as the second doses build up we need to increase the total number of vaccinations given even to stay at the current rate. That is why an 8% increase over a week doesn't really cut it.
1. Scrapping tertiary fees 2. Legalising cannabis 3. EFTA entry 4. Replacing council tax with land tax, tapered over time. 5. Strengthening protections for free speech and personal privacy 6. A way of addressing Google/Facebook monopolies 7. Experiments with UBI 8. Scrapping the TV license fee 9. An end to Covid restrictions 10. PR for local govt
An interesting LD prospectus. Needs some proposals for raising significant taxes to pay for it.
1 - Could cost £5bn a year. 2 - Hope that psychosis does not increase. Would tax on this pay for 1 and 8? 3 - Pros and cons to debate. Potentially might help LDs a little with the 52% they defined as thick racists, whilst keeping their FBPE tendency on board. 4 - Yes - though we have a fully worked out set of proposals from some time ago for adjusting Council Tax / Stamp Duty which are far better. IMO Land Tax is based far too heavily on future usage class guesses by bureaucrats, and the last set of published proposals had not thought through consequences in any serious way. 5 - Yes. 6 - Yes if not just a bandwagon a la Australia. 7 - Very questionable / shot in the dark. I prefer Experiments with Mice by Johnny Dankworth. 8 - Yes, but how to raise £4bn a year for the BBC? 9 - Yes 10 - Would this be combined with any changes? Tories currently planning to throw it all in the air again afaics.
Tax cannabis. Tax mobile / broadband connections (to pay for the BBC). Council > Land tax would need to be cost neutral, at least over time.
I am only suggesting experimenting with UBI. I’d pick a few smaller towns: say, Derry, Worcester and Dover, and see what happens.
4 A development land tax would be preferanle, as it would push down profits from countryside land sales generally in my experience helping the Tories in local government and their mates. In my view this is a prime source of corruption at local government level. Farmland which as soon as being designated as development land suddenly appreciates 1000% is not earned income and even if done fairly unduly benefits the landowner for no effort, encourages land ownership rather than appropriate use.
And some free advice to Sir Keir's speechwriters: when the Leader of the Opposition announces a policy (especially an old-hat one re-branded as a 'British Recovery Bond'), it really doesn't help to have him say "This is bold, it’s innovative." [Titter ye not at the back - that is a real quote from the speech.]
If it really is bold and innovative, you don't need to say so. And if, like this announcement, it's tired, old-hat and of no benefit, marking your own homework as bold and innovative just looks silly.
Vaccination numbers 108% of last week's totals at the same point.
That's a bit of a plateau. In fairness its a fairly high plateau but still. As we move into more mobile age groups we really should be doing a little better.
No, we need to start thinking about how to handle capacity for both doses needing to be given simultaneously and ensuring that neither programme slows down in the interim.
Exactly, as the second doses build up we need to increase the total number of vaccinations given even to stay at the current rate. That is why an 8% increase over a week doesn't really cut it.
I expect supply of Pfizer is being stockpiled right now because we can't rely on a JiT supply chain for what we have done as we've disregarded the manufacturer recommendation and not held 50% of received doses back for three weeks later.
And some free advice to Sir Keir's speechwriters: when the Leader of the Opposition announces a policy (especially an old-hat one re-branded as a 'British Recovery Bond'), it really doesn't help to have him say "This is bold, it’s innovative." [Titter ye not at the back - that is a real quote from the speech.]
If it really is bold and innovative, you don't need to say so. And if, like this announcement, it's tired, old-hat and of no benefit, marking your own homework as bold and innovative just looks silly.
Perhaps he should have had a light suit, Stravinsky to introduce himself and as background some very abstract art?
Comments
I think you'll find it was Boris that took Corbyn down. Starmer just clung close enough to Corbyn he could take the reins once he stepped down.
https://twitter.com/GerryHassan/status/1362400514797940739?s=20
Why is a respected academic aping Richard Littlejohn?
I want to know if @Gardenwalker really is 'like a teddy bear'.
I believe the approved penalty for hurting feelings *and* making someone feel "unsafe" is impalemnent followed by burning alive.
So we probably need someone with hundreds of sexual conquests for the naming.
Perhaps the planet needs to be renamed SeanT ?
https://comresglobal.com/polls/savanta-comres-political-tracker-february-2021/
Edinburgh is much more friendlier than Glasgow in my experience.
Starmer's years in the Shadow Cabinet serving under an anti-semite goes to his character, that will be weighed at the next election. Where he will be found wanting on various levels, that being one.
“Glasgow’s miles better”, was the ‘80s tourist board campaign slogan.
So if you're past the NI/IC thresholds your wages get taxed NI/IC, then your net takehome pay gets 'taxed' a further 73% on top of that.
I think earnest types who play everything with a straight bat and live via spreadsheets can be left baffled by the popularity of those who dazzle despite their inconsistencies. We see it with Boris vs Sir Keir in no uncertain terms. I was a bit baffled at times by my friends success with women, in business, etc, I often thought ‘he’s blagging that, can’t they tell?’ but the truth was it didn’t really matter, some people are magnetic, and that’s what you need to be to get people to believe in you
"Who would make the best PM (changes from Jan): Boris Johnson 43% (+5), Sir Keir Starmer 27% (-4), Don’t know 30% (-2)"
Anyway Liverpool came 4th which is better than they're doing in the PL.
Tax mobile / broadband connections (to pay for the BBC).
Council > Land tax would need to be cost neutral, at least over time.
I am only suggesting experimenting with UBI. I’d pick a few smaller towns: say, Derry, Worcester and Dover, and see what happens.
It's rather repetitive, and too focused on bashing the government, rather than on what he needs to address, which is what Labour would do differently. The big ideas seem to be extending furlough and the UC uplift, and err, something incoherent about bonds, which seems to be a bung to wealthy savers. Very odd, especially since I'd hazard a guess that Rishi has already thought of the first two at least.
Is that really the best he can come up with? And nothing significant about improving Boris' disastrous Brexit deal, or NI, or Scotland, or social care (other than criticising the Tories), or healthcare, or education. I was still waiting to get to the meat of the speech when it abruptly ended, as though someone had accidentally erased the substantive bit.
I remember, with my wife, meeting some random chap at the Clutha Vaults and before we knew it were were on a drunken tour of folk music joints and secret pool halls.
This is incredibly odd behaviour for me (and my wife)
Think how many you would need to cover the coastline. Too short ranged, too slow at longer ranges unless you are using way-out stuff like rockets or what are effectively expensive slf-guided mini-subs - ie underwater drones (but unmanned). Also to some extent vulnerable to passive and active defences nowadays. And you need a sensor system to identify and track targets. And persons controlling them.
Why bother working past 16 hours if you're taking home £1 per hour past that point?
Now we don't have to.
If we can hit 3m a week until Easter that'll get Groups 5-9 done (17 million). Its only in April that capacity really needs to be ramped up to ensure 2nd doses don't lead to a stangnation of new 1st doses.
Starmer is complicit in protecting and enhancing the already well feathered nest of a patrician middle class of which he is a card carrying member. Johnson also courts this class because it screeches loudest and longest whenever things it doesn't like happen.
The person to tell this class to go f8ck itself longest and loudest gets the keys to Britain.
If you openly oppose the incumbent party leader and refuse to even serve under them you almost never wear the crown, even if that party leader loses, as you look disloyal.
Labour would be winning over no extra Tory voters under Cooper than under Starmer and indeed might be losing even more voters to the Greens
That was one of many anomalies that UC addressed. Yes, the withdrawal rate is high, but it’s infinitely better than what went before.
One lady who worked for me had to cut her hours from 25 to 16, because her husband lost his job, and if she was working 25h he couldn’t claim unemployment and income support. That sort of madness was encouraged by the system.
Many in the private sector have lost their jobs or are managing on 80% of what they earned in the past for now, only to possibly be told there is no job when the scheme runs out. Often these workers were pretty moderately paid when they were on 100%, and they also have to factor in childcare because schools are closed. Rent arrears are soaring and eviction holidays won't last forever. Some industries (hospitality, Weddings, catering, events) will take years to recover fully. There are millions of these workers.
I appreciate that there may be some sweeping classifications in what I wrote but when you are talking about blocs of voters they can be difficult to avoid.
I see two parts to this - one is associated with student politics, as discussed a little yesterday. However even that has a serious side to it - a few years ago when the NUS had an institutionally racist period (eg refusing to allow Jewish Students to organise as a minority, whilst permitting it for others), it gave implicit encouragement to various kinds of abuse.
eg https://www.thejc.com/police-called-as-pro-israel-meeting-at-king-s-college-london-disrupted-by-protesters-1.57761
More recently:https://metro.co.uk/2019/03/01/as-a-jewish-student-i-feel-unsafe-on-campus-we-need-solidarity-now-more-than-ever-8763042/
Obvs you have the silly stuff - banning the Daily Mail from shops and so, but to pretend it is all silly stuff is itself absurd. That is where I think Alistair got it wholly wrong yesterday.
The other is a culture from the top that seems to me to be a lack of a moral amongst university managements. I'd point for example to relatively uncritical cave-ins to 'anti-colonialist' campaigners - see the initial response to "Rhodes Must Go" for an example.
Also this kind of thing, where York Uni withdrew support for an "international mens' day event" discussing, amongst other things, rates of male suicide - because some feminists (almost all activists not students) had written to a local newspaper. They should have been capable of holding the ring on this, rather than just caving in to whatever the latest lot of campaigners say.
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/nov/17/row-after-university-of-york-cancels-international-mens-day-event
There's stuff in the academic body too, but that is a more difficult one.
The Germans are quite unlikely to re-float the Blucher, declare war and send her cruising up the Thames.....
Aside from that, no conceivable attack on the UK involves getting within 10 miles of the coast, on or below the water.
Cruise missiles are the first thing that comes to mind....
As Hermann Khan observed, the enemy has a nasty habit of observing what your capabilities are and doing something else.
fixed that for you
Really hope the Olympics goes ahead, the world needs a masssive event to cheer it up right now.
https://twitter.com/Edwina_Currie/status/1339155190092607489
The mutation has been found in Leeds, so the Department of Health has announced extra testing and genomic sequencing to track down any other cases and control the spread.
It is the latest area of the country to have targeted testing set up.
People in the LS8 postcode, including parts of Harehills and the area just north of Easterly Road where the variant was found, are being "strongly encouraged" to take a test when offered, whether or not they have symptoms.
https://twitter.com/BestForBritain/status/1362352067944325121?s=20
They all ran away on Saturday for a typhoon a couple of years back.
If it really is bold and innovative, you don't need to say so. And if, like this announcement, it's tired, old-hat and of no benefit, marking your own homework as bold and innovative just looks silly.