So, I'm starting another stint as Guest Editor of PB in the next few days, if any of you have any pieces you'd like me to consider for publication, let me know.
Otherwise everyday will feature a thread on AV or Scottish Independence, somedays, I may even combine them both.
NEW: Simon Case letter to Perm Secs: "serious issues have come to light which are of acute concern for us as the senior leadership team of the Civil Service" They have until Fri to declare "any instances of senior civil servants holding remunerated positions or other interests".
Why the Friday deadline?
I suspect that you're making this up.
Me?
Are you joking ?
My apologies. You're in the right. I still don't believe the deadline though.
So, I'm starting another stint as Guest Editor of PB in the next few days, if any of you have any pieces you'd like me to consider for publication, let me know.
Otherwise everyday will feature a thread on AV or Scottish Independence, somedays, I may even combine them both.
I'll email you one, but its on one of those subjects. I hope that's OK.
Scottish independence...and the tank invasion to prevent it?
Tanks would be useless in an invasion of Scotland even before you consider the mothballing of the Challenger II tanks.
To invade Scotland we'd need 3 Commando Brigade and 16 Air Assault Brigade to do the heavy lifting.
I’d be worried about asymmetric warfare - those highlanders retreating to their mountains and conducting hit and run attacks...
So, I'm starting another stint as Guest Editor of PB in the next few days, if any of you have any pieces you'd like me to consider for publication, let me know.
Otherwise everyday will feature a thread on AV or Scottish Independence, somedays, I may even combine them both.
I'll email you one, but its on one of those subjects. I hope that's OK.
Scottish independence...and the tank invasion to prevent it?
Tanks would be useless in an invasion of Scotland even before you consider the mothballing of the Challenger II tanks.
To invade Scotland we'd need 3 Commando Brigade and 16 Air Assault Brigade to do the heavy lifting.
That will come as a crushing disappointment to HYUFD.
Reclaiming over a billion pounds a month NET and increasing annually in membership fees we no longer need to pay?
Taking back control of our laws, set by our Parliament to suit us?
Signing new trade deals with the rest of the world that make up the majority of our trade already?
Joining the CPTPP which is not just a faster growing trade organisation than the EU, but will also be once we join a larger trade organisation than the EU itself - and will come on top of a zero tariff/zero quota deal with the EU?
That sort of thing? Those of us who aren't stuck in the past can see the benefits even if you haven't caught up yet.
1. Dwarfed by the massive increased red tape costs (and you've forgotten the ongoing payments to the EU)
2. Taking back control to the extent that the government can't authorise the sale of a bag of seed potatoes from one part of our own country to another. Yeah, wonderful.
3. Signing trade deals is a good thing, yes, compared with not doing so, but they only replicate what we already had.
4. No-one, not a single person on this earth who has looked at joining CPTPP in any detail thinks that (if indeed we do join) it will make any noticeable difference at all, certainly nothing like enough to compensate for the catastrophic increase in costs and non-tariff barriers Boris has created.
1a. The ongoing payments to the EU are miniscule in comparison and are from liabilities accrued during membership. The notion we should continue accruing liabilities because we had some is rather perverse so do you really mean that?
1b. As for the red tape costs I'll say [Citation Needed] that they dwarf the membership costs please. Plus while the red tape costs are far from ideal at least a significant chunk of them are paying people in this country to certify forms etc who will then circulate the money domestically as opposed to abroad.
2. I don't care about Northern Ireland. Not many do. Not ideal but domestic stuff is more important.
3. Simply wrong, we are negotiating new deals that we did not have before.
4. Disagreed. Plus it's only one example of many.
Something tells me you two will still be having this discussion in 50 years' time ...
Of course the debate isn't going to go away- any more than it did after 1975.
If the Brexit Project works- if it makes people happier, more prosperous and more in control of their lives- it will stick.
So, I'm starting another stint as Guest Editor of PB in the next few days, if any of you have any pieces you'd like me to consider for publication, let me know.
Otherwise everyday will feature a thread on AV or Scottish Independence, somedays, I may even combine them both.
I'll email you one, but its on one of those subjects. I hope that's OK.
Scottish independence...and the tank invasion to prevent it?
Tanks would be useless in an invasion of Scotland even before you consider the mothballing of the Challenger II tanks.
To invade Scotland we'd need 3 Commando Brigade and 16 Air Assault Brigade to do the heavy lifting.
One man could win though. Probably not with a flag.
Reclaiming over a billion pounds a month NET and increasing annually in membership fees we no longer need to pay?
Taking back control of our laws, set by our Parliament to suit us?
Signing new trade deals with the rest of the world that make up the majority of our trade already?
Joining the CPTPP which is not just a faster growing trade organisation than the EU, but will also be once we join a larger trade organisation than the EU itself - and will come on top of a zero tariff/zero quota deal with the EU?
That sort of thing? Those of us who aren't stuck in the past can see the benefits even if you haven't caught up yet.
1. Dwarfed by the massive increased red tape costs (and you've forgotten the ongoing payments to the EU)
2. Taking back control to the extent that the government can't authorise the sale of a bag of seed potatoes from one part of our own country to another. Yeah, wonderful.
3. Signing trade deals is a good thing, yes, compared with not doing so, but they only replicate what we already had.
4. No-one, not a single person on this earth who has looked at joining CPTPP in any detail thinks that (if indeed we do join) it will make any noticeable difference at all, certainly nothing like enough to compensate for the catastrophic increase in costs and non-tariff barriers Boris has created.
1a. The ongoing payments to the EU are miniscule in comparison and are from liabilities accrued during membership. The notion we should continue accruing liabilities because we had some is rather perverse so do you really mean that?
1b. As for the red tape costs I'll say [Citation Needed] that they dwarf the membership costs please. Plus while the red tape costs are far from ideal at least a significant chunk of them are paying people in this country to certify forms etc who will then circulate the money domestically as opposed to abroad.
2. I don't care about Northern Ireland. Not many do. Not ideal but domestic stuff is more important.
3. Simply wrong, we are negotiating new deals that we did not have before.
4. Disagreed. Plus it's only one example of many.
Hang-on. Isn't NI domestic? Or are you truly a Little Englander?
I'm truly English.
Up to you whether you want to consider that "little" or not.
So, I'm starting another stint as Guest Editor of PB in the next few days, if any of you have any pieces you'd like me to consider for publication, let me know.
Otherwise everyday will feature a thread on AV or Scottish Independence, somedays, I may even combine them both.
I'll email you one, but its on one of those subjects. I hope that's OK.
Scottish independence...and the tank invasion to prevent it?
Tanks would be useless in an invasion of Scotland even before you consider the mothballing of the Challenger II tanks.
To invade Scotland we'd need 3 Commando Brigade and 16 Air Assault Brigade to do the heavy lifting.
The cases look pretty decent; there's only one local authority area with a seven day rate above 100 per 100k left, and the zones of extremely low prevalence are gradually edging across the map.
The death count, however... if that becomes sticky then the excuse for stalling the unlockdown plan presents itself. The fact that maybe 11,000 people kick the bucket every week in the UK is irrelevant: 250-odd is an entire Airbus-A330 load of corpses every week, and will be presented (and understood by ignorant and frightened members of the public) in those sorts of terms. Casualties enormous, not safe, sorry.
I think the fact we still have 2,481 patients ill enough to be in hospital guarantees more deaths in the next few weeks and months, Of those 370 are reported as on ventilation, I am also a bit suspicious of the lags in death reporting. Its not unknown for deaths to hit the figures months after the actual passing, for whatever reason.
Hopefully though the direction of travel for deaths within 28 days of a test will stay the same.
Telegraph reported this morning that many of the recent deaths were definitely 'with' rather than 'of' covid.
Assuming we can't get case numbers to zero then there will always be some deaths 'with' presumably, even for the vaccinated? e.g. in hospital with later stage cancer but a mild or even non symptomatic case of covid 23 days previous.
Time to tighten up the stats?
I notice Israel can’t seem to get down below around 8 deaths a day.
Which is interesting as that's equivalent to 60/day in the UK and we are below that already.
There is a large percentage of the Israeli population who won't accept the vaccine...
I presume there's been comment on the new London Mayoral polling from Opinium.
Sadiq Khan will be relaxed with a rating of 51% (-2) while Bailey (29%), Berry and Porritt (both 8%) are all up a point but this is margin of error stuff.
Khan beats Bailey 64-36 in a run off (Khan down 2, Bailey up 2).
Few give a monkeys whether you are prepared to "forgive" the Royal Family" It is yet another attempt to grab the limelight.
Kindly go away and annoy someone else (as you surely will).
Thank you
SR2
You seem obsessed with The Duchess of Sussex.
What do you make of this though?
PRINCE Andrew reportedly told the Queen he wished to dress in Admiral uniform for Prince Philip's funeral - despite deferring the title after the Jeffrey Epstein sex scandal.
The Duke of York, who stepped back from public duties over his friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein 18 months ago, was made an honorary Vice-Admiral in the Royal Navy on his 55th birthday in 2015.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Few give a monkeys whether you are prepared to "forgive" the Royal Family" It is yet another attempt to grab the limelight.
Kindly go away and annoy someone else (as you surely will).
Thank you
SR2
You seem obsessed with The Duchess of Sussex.
What do you make of this though?
PRINCE Andrew reportedly told the Queen he wished to dress in Admiral uniform for Prince Philip's funeral - despite deferring the title after the Jeffrey Epstein sex scandal.
The Duke of York, who stepped back from public duties over his friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein 18 months ago, was made an honorary Vice-Admiral in the Royal Navy on his 55th birthday in 2015.
Unbelievable. In what dark recess of his tiny brain does Andrew think he merits the uniform of Admiral?
He had been promised a promotion on his 60 birthday. It was deferred because of the Epstein situation. He thinks that he should get to wear the uniform despite not being promoted.
The politest comment I can think of is is that he is utterly tin-eared
Some years ago, RN's Spearfish torpedos came due for a mid life overhaul/upgrade.
Spearfish is an example of a weapon that is made in the UK and is actually pretty good.
One of the companies involved in building them put in a bid to go the maintenance on the hydraulics. Because of the compact design of the systems to fit in the torpedo, the hydraulics were one of kind. It turned out that when developing them for the torpedo, the company in question had used a cunning and fairly standard tactic. They had spent some of their own money on tools and designs. So they owned the IP.
This meant that only they could do the work. The bid they put in for the maintenance work was... impressive.
A couple of bright sparks at the MoD realised that technology had moved on. They worked out that you could replace the hydraulic systems in the torpedo with electrical actuators. Which were cheaper, safer (no liquids at a zillion psi) and practically maintenance free. Oh, and lighter. The cost of replacement was a fraction of the cost of the upgrade of the hydraulics.
The response was this - an attempt by civil servants and politicians to get the electrical upgrade binned and the the people responsible fired. On the grounds of "protecting the industrial base".
Both the civil servants and politicians involved were... connected to the company in question.
The upgrade to use the electrical system went ahead, IIRC.
So, I'm starting another stint as Guest Editor of PB in the next few days, if any of you have any pieces you'd like me to consider for publication, let me know.
Otherwise everyday will feature a thread on AV or Scottish Independence, somedays, I may even combine them both.
How much pineapple should you have on your pizza: Results under FPTP vs AV
So, I'm starting another stint as Guest Editor of PB in the next few days, if any of you have any pieces you'd like me to consider for publication, let me know.
Otherwise everyday will feature a thread on AV or Scottish Independence, somedays, I may even combine them both.
How much pineapple should you have on your pizza: Results under FPTP vs AV
Famous people you thought were dead until you visited your Chippy
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
So, I'm starting another stint as Guest Editor of PB in the next few days, if any of you have any pieces you'd like me to consider for publication, let me know.
Otherwise everyday will feature a thread on AV or Scottish Independence, somedays, I may even combine them both.
I'll email you one, but its on one of those subjects. I hope that's OK.
Scottish independence...and the tank invasion to prevent it?
Tanks would be useless in an invasion of Scotland even before you consider the mothballing of the Challenger II tanks.
To invade Scotland we'd need 3 Commando Brigade and 16 Air Assault Brigade to do the heavy lifting.
Or a few boughs from Birnam Wood.
A particularly stubborn sapling from Epping Forest will do the job.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
That's probably the problem for the foreseeable future. Of course, this is where populist governments end up. (Challenge: can anyone name a populist government that has caused its country to thrive, as opposed to the members of said government? I genuinely can't, and would be happier if I thought this story had a happy ending.) However, there are two bits of hope.
First, the government was in a significant pickle in December and has only been saved by the vaccine bounce. The GBP are rewarding and punishing the government reasonably rationally for successes and failures. We're not quite at Latin American standards, even Italian standards, yet. And this government is likely to fail more than it succeeds, because it has BoJo at its head and lickspittles under him.
Second, events. Although BoJo and co are hollow enough to ignore scandals that would have felled other politicians, funny things can happen. Think back to the expenses scandal. One of the key phrases that people remember from that time is "Duck House". Now Sir Peter Viggers was the MP for my hometown. Career had been over in the 1980s really, should have retired in 2001, but decent cove and mostly harmless. I delivered leaflets for him back in the day. He was far from the worst sinner in the scandal (I think he never got the money for the damn thing) but something about the absurdity of him asking if he could claim for a duck house cut through with the public in a way that worse examples of greed didn't. This scandal, or one of the many that are surely in the pipeline, has the potential for something really trivial that causes the public to turn. Because the public are like that.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
Not the only reason, but I agree. We see now how the Lib Dems kept the Tories under control. The post 2015 chaos and incompetence of a majority Tory government shows the difference.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
Not the only reason, but I agree. We see now how the Lib Dems kept the Tories under control. The post 2015 chaos and incompetence of a majority Tory government shows the difference.
Austerity supported by LDs vs Austerity enabled by LDs same difference
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
Not the only reason, but I agree. We see now how the Lib Dems kept the Tories under control. The post 2015 chaos and incompetence of a majority Tory government shows the difference.
Austerity supported by LDs vs Austerity enabled by LDs same difference
Labour planned austerity in 2010 too. That's what happens when the money runs out. We will see it again soon.
We've got ~ 19.5 million Astraed up people in the country. I think aside from blood clots we should probably slow that right down and move to the slightly higher efficacy vaccines for the remainder of the population. Astra is a great vaccine for preventing severe disease but we're past that and could probably hit sterlising immunity with other vaccines, particularly mRNA. Boosters of a different type in the Autumn would be a great idea I think - over 50 prior Astra with an mRNA or Novavax and mix and match 2nd dosing would push us up higher. Right now I have us at a restriction free stopping r(0) from both viruses and infections of 2. Paediatric approval for mRNA vaccines would be fab too.
Reclaiming over a billion pounds a month NET and increasing annually in membership fees we no longer need to pay?
Taking back control of our laws, set by our Parliament to suit us?
Signing new trade deals with the rest of the world that make up the majority of our trade already?
Joining the CPTPP which is not just a faster growing trade organisation than the EU, but will also be once we join a larger trade organisation than the EU itself - and will come on top of a zero tariff/zero quota deal with the EU?
That sort of thing? Those of us who aren't stuck in the past can see the benefits even if you haven't caught up yet.
1. Dwarfed by the massive increased red tape costs (and you've forgotten the ongoing payments to the EU)
2. Taking back control to the extent that the government can't authorise the sale of a bag of seed potatoes from one part of our own country to another. Yeah, wonderful.
3. Signing trade deals is a good thing, yes, compared with not doing so, but they only replicate what we already had.
4. No-one, not a single person on this earth who has looked at joining CPTPP in any detail thinks that (if indeed we do join) it will make any noticeable difference at all, certainly nothing like enough to compensate for the catastrophic increase in costs and non-tariff barriers Boris has created.
1a. The ongoing payments to the EU are miniscule in comparison and are from liabilities accrued during membership. The notion we should continue accruing liabilities because we had some is rather perverse so do you really mean that?
1b. As for the red tape costs I'll say [Citation Needed] that they dwarf the membership costs please. Plus while the red tape costs are far from ideal at least a significant chunk of them are paying people in this country to certify forms etc who will then circulate the money domestically as opposed to abroad.
2. I don't care about Northern Ireland. Not many do. Not ideal but domestic stuff is more important.
3. Simply wrong, we are negotiating new deals that we did not have before.
4. Disagreed. Plus it's only one example of many.
Something tells me you two will still be having this discussion in 50 years' time ...
Of course the debate isn't going to go away- any more than it did after 1975.
If the Brexit Project works- if it makes people happier, more prosperous and more in control of their lives- it will stick.
If it doesn't, it won't.
I think it will, because the world will move on. So the debate will come in time to be anachronistic.
"Europe" isn't the future as it looked in the 1970s, and the international challenges we face now can only be solved globally.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
Not the only reason, but I agree. We see now how the Lib Dems kept the Tories under control. The post 2015 chaos and incompetence of a majority Tory government shows the difference.
Austerity supported by LDs vs Austerity enabled by LDs same difference
To many it probably is. To others the point of a third centre party is its ability to form coalitions. They are probably the party closest to my views but I really struggle to see the point of them if they do not embrace coalitions, and take responsibility for explaining why they are better to the electorate.
Few give a monkeys whether you are prepared to "forgive" the Royal Family" It is yet another attempt to grab the limelight.
Kindly go away and annoy someone else (as you surely will).
Thank you
SR2
You seem obsessed with The Duchess of Sussex.
What do you make of this though?
PRINCE Andrew reportedly told the Queen he wished to dress in Admiral uniform for Prince Philip's funeral - despite deferring the title after the Jeffrey Epstein sex scandal.
The Duke of York, who stepped back from public duties over his friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein 18 months ago, was made an honorary Vice-Admiral in the Royal Navy on his 55th birthday in 2015.
Unbelievable. In what dark recess of his tiny brain does Andrew think he merits the uniform of Admiral?
He had been promised a promotion on his 60 birthday. It was deferred because of the Epstein situation. He thinks that he should get to wear the uniform despite not being promoted.
The politest comment I can think of is is that he is utterly tin-eared
What does he actually think being 'promoted' would mean? Would he get more pay? Be able to order more people or ships around? Would anyone respect him more (or at all)?
There must be Trumpian levels of self-delusion involved.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
Not the only reason, but I agree. We see now how the Lib Dems kept the Tories under control. The post 2015 chaos and incompetence of a majority Tory government shows the difference.
The only chaos and incompetence was when Mrs Strong & Stable took over and threw away the majority.
There's been great competence since then which is how we managed to get a revised Brexit agreement, a trade deal and world beating vaccinations.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
They should have been proud of their achievements in government, but instead most were ashamed of them almost immediately.
New to the thread, but take it someone has already posted ‘broken, sleazy tories on the slide...’
They are not sliding though.
Just this gut feel in Boris and this liberal Tory government, the vast majority of the British People (English and Welsh as Romans dubbed it) have the prime minister and the Government they have wanted for decades. Next 2 GE sown up I think, especially as Labour don’t have a credible Prime Minister in waiting.
You really are barking mad. You are now predicting a Tory govt with certainty untill 2034. No unforseen events between now and then? Nothing like, I don't know covid or Brexit might turnup.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
So you are saying he busts crims without favour? That's probably the most positive thing said about him on here for weeks.
6 years on and it seems we are still arguing about the Coalition.
Perhaps arguing isn't the right word - those who are anti-LD will doubtless witter on about it for as long as the Conservatives used to mention the "Winter of Discontent" regarding Labour.
In other words, long after most people have forgotten about it or stopped caring about it.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
This is one of those weird statements that I see repeated as fact a lot.
Simply going into coalition with the Tories broke the Lib Dems in the eyes of many voters.
In 2010 they got 18.9% of the vote in Scotland, in 2011 they got 8% - losing over half their vote. This was not down to failing to own their record in government.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
This is one of those weird statements that I see repeated as fact a lot.
Simply going into coalition with the Tories broke the Lib Dems in the eyes of many voters.
In 2010 they got 18.9% of the vote in Scotland, in 2011 they got 8% - losing over half their vote. This was not down to failing to own their record in government.
I think it was inevitable that they'd lose seats in 2010 (certainly most of the Labour facing ones). But I think they could have done a better job than they did. That alternative budget was one of the most bizarre things I've ever seen.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
So you are saying he busts crims without favour? That's probably the most positive thing said about him on here for weeks.
He was good at PMQs today
Made the PM look dodgy as hell
Hope it leads to a bounce for PV deadline but one swallow a summer does not make so not overly hopeful
You’re better off stacking shelves at Morrison’s than caring for older and disabled people, and that’s not good enough for our country. #COVID19 has exposed the urgent need to reform staff pay, terms & conditions. My question in Parliament today...."
This seems a far bigger scandal to me than an inflation based pay rise for nurses.
Whilst I'd be in favour of paying nurses more if we can afford it (we probably cant), imo we must find more money to pay care staff appropriately, which means significant year on year increases maintained over several years.
Liz 4% Kendall sneering at "shelf stackers" not a good look either.
Does she really even think there is a job called that,and after shop workers have risked their lives too to keep the shops open why sneer at them.
Typical out of touch Politician or just terrible wording from a talentless individual?
I think those having a go at Liz Kendall, are those who would be having a go at er anyway, and the outrage is confected. It is not a sneer imo.
Shelf stacker is still a relevant term, though in some places it has been 'remanufactured' as "Night Replenishment Assistant".
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
This is one of those weird statements that I see repeated as fact a lot.
Simply going into coalition with the Tories broke the Lib Dems in the eyes of many voters.
In 2010 they got 18.9% of the vote in Scotland, in 2011 they got 8% - losing over half their vote. This was not down to failing to own their record in government.
Yeah but they compounded that by losing the other half too.
By going into office with the Tories they lost their left-leaning supporters. By disowning and seeming to be embarrassed by their record they lost their right-leaning supporters.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
So you are saying he busts crims without favour? That's probably the most positive thing said about him on here for weeks.
6 years on and it seems we are still arguing about the Coalition.
Perhaps arguing isn't the right word - those who are anti-LD will doubtless witter on about it for as long as the Conservatives used to mention the "Winter of Discontent" regarding Labour.
In other words, long after most people have forgotten about it or stopped caring about it.
As a potential LD voter my very blunt question is what is the point of the LDs in the 2020s?
Are they trying to be a party of national govt? Is it a movement to retain a liberal voice in discourse? Is it about another coalition? Is it about local government?
It seems to try to do a bit of everything without much focus, and therefore is failing at everything.
Two big gripes from me would be as said not being proud of its record in govt and secondly not supporting any of the indicative votes in the Brexit process which would have saved us from "Boris" and his authoritarian kleptocracy.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
This is one of those weird statements that I see repeated as fact a lot.
Simply going into coalition with the Tories broke the Lib Dems in the eyes of many voters.
In 2010 they got 18.9% of the vote in Scotland, in 2011 they got 8% - losing over half their vote. This was not down to failing to own their record in government.
Indeed. The Lib Dems' poll ratings went down exactly in tandem with their association with a Conservative government. As the memory wears off, theiir share as the traditional nonconformist protest vote, originally in fact a Protestant Nonconformist vote, will rise again.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
So you are saying he busts crims without favour? That's probably the most positive thing said about him on here for weeks.
As DPP, one would hope so. The point is that Labour sleaze is as prevalent as the Tory type, and voters don't distinguish, so the impact on voting intention is minimal.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
This is one of those weird statements that I see repeated as fact a lot.
Simply going into coalition with the Tories broke the Lib Dems in the eyes of many voters.
In 2010 they got 18.9% of the vote in Scotland, in 2011 they got 8% - losing over half their vote. This was not down to failing to own their record in government.
A chunk of their vote was won on the basis of "It's a two horse race; only Liberal Democrats can beat the Tories here". And another chunk of their vote was won on the basis of "It's a two horse race; only Liberal Democrats can beat Labour here."
One of those chunks of vote was always going to go up in smoke in any hung parliament scenario. Different decisions in 2010 might have saved some of it, but not much.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
This is one of those weird statements that I see repeated as fact a lot.
Simply going into coalition with the Tories broke the Lib Dems in the eyes of many voters.
In 2010 they got 18.9% of the vote in Scotland, in 2011 they got 8% - losing over half their vote. This was not down to failing to own their record in government.
Yes, that is true, and they never regained that ground. They did some great stuff in government though, particularly Lamb, Davey, Alexander, Laws, and perhaps most importantly Webb.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
I thought you were a fan of the coalition government? That's who's bent, not the current administration (they might be too, but from what I can tell Sunak did everything right).
Yes, by and large I was a supporter of the Coalition. That doesn't make me blind to the sleaze, and I think that the key events were under Tory control, and/or after 2015.
The lack of wanting to own the coalition record in government is why the Lib Dems got their arses hand to them by the electorate.
Not the only reason, but I agree. We see now how the Lib Dems kept the Tories under control. The post 2015 chaos and incompetence of a majority Tory government shows the difference.
The only chaos and incompetence was when Mrs Strong & Stable took over and threw away the majority.
There's been great competence since then which is how we managed to get a revised Brexit agreement, a trade deal and world beating vaccinations.
She's a case study in how far and fast you fall when you have zero people skills.
Few give a monkeys whether you are prepared to "forgive" the Royal Family" It is yet another attempt to grab the limelight.
Kindly go away and annoy someone else (as you surely will).
Thank you
SR2
You seem obsessed with The Duchess of Sussex.
What do you make of this though?
PRINCE Andrew reportedly told the Queen he wished to dress in Admiral uniform for Prince Philip's funeral - despite deferring the title after the Jeffrey Epstein sex scandal.
The Duke of York, who stepped back from public duties over his friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein 18 months ago, was made an honorary Vice-Admiral in the Royal Navy on his 55th birthday in 2015.
Time to ditch the lot of it. Tony Benn was absolutely right - the whole point of all this nonsense is to convey the message to the public that these people are so "important" that they must be deferred to and so that nobody will challenge their privileges.
There are plenty of valid arguments to be made in favour of republicanism, but practically no public interest in actually implementing it.
I am not sure about Andrew. He seems to have been very foolish.. Best to keep.out of the limelight,.. just like Ms Markle should. I am actually angrier with Harry for allowing the broadcast to happen.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
A feather in his cap then.
This looks different to previous misdemeanors like Jenrick and the pornographer. It ties some of the earlier accusations against the Johnson Government together. Johnson's popularity is riding high at present, and he seems content for Cameron to take the fall, however when the government starts to struggle, which is inevitable, and another minor scandal hits the headlines, this one will be dredged up, and its effect will gain traction.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
So you are saying he busts crims without favour? That's probably the most positive thing said about him on here for weeks.
As DPP, one would hope so. The point is that Labour sleaze is as prevalent as the Tory type, and voters don't distinguish, so the impact on voting intention is minimal.
Nah, it is sleaze in government that bothers them. "Chuck 'em out, the scoundrels" applies to governments not oppositions.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
So you are saying he busts crims without favour? That's probably the most positive thing said about him on here for weeks.
As DPP, one would hope so. The point is that Labour sleaze is as prevalent as the Tory type, and voters don't distinguish, so the impact on voting intention is minimal.
I can see it now. Starmers the man to clean up politics after the excesses of the Boris years.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
So you are saying he busts crims without favour? That's probably the most positive thing said about him on here for weeks.
As DPP, one would hope so. The point is that Labour sleaze is as prevalent as the Tory type, and voters don't distinguish, so the impact on voting intention is minimal.
Nah, it is sleaze in government that bothers them. "Chuck 'em out, the scoundrels" applies to governments not oppositions.
So if, according to you, the government is so very sleazy, why do the voters appear not to give a toss about it?
Few give a monkeys whether you are prepared to "forgive" the Royal Family" It is yet another attempt to grab the limelight.
Kindly go away and annoy someone else (as you surely will).
Thank you
SR2
You seem obsessed with The Duchess of Sussex.
What do you make of this though?
PRINCE Andrew reportedly told the Queen he wished to dress in Admiral uniform for Prince Philip's funeral - despite deferring the title after the Jeffrey Epstein sex scandal.
The Duke of York, who stepped back from public duties over his friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein 18 months ago, was made an honorary Vice-Admiral in the Royal Navy on his 55th birthday in 2015.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
So you are saying he busts crims without favour? That's probably the most positive thing said about him on here for weeks.
As DPP, one would hope so. The point is that Labour sleaze is as prevalent as the Tory type, and voters don't distinguish, so the impact on voting intention is minimal.
Nah, it is sleaze in government that bothers them. "Chuck 'em out, the scoundrels" applies to governments not oppositions.
So if, according to you, the government is so very sleazy, why do the voters appear not to give a toss about it?
Taxpayers haven’t yet got the bill for all these favours , but when it comes people are not going to be happy.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
So you are saying he busts crims without favour? That's probably the most positive thing said about him on here for weeks.
As DPP, one would hope so. The point is that Labour sleaze is as prevalent as the Tory type, and voters don't distinguish, so the impact on voting intention is minimal.
Nah, it is sleaze in government that bothers them. "Chuck 'em out, the scoundrels" applies to governments not oppositions.
No, because that's predicated on a belief that the Opposition will be better when takes office - that's why Blair pledged to be Whiter than White.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
That's probably the problem for the foreseeable future. Of course, this is where populist governments end up. (Challenge: can anyone name a populist government that has caused its country to thrive, as opposed to the members of said government? I genuinely can't, and would be happier if I thought this story had a happy ending.) However, there are two bits of hope.
First, the government was in a significant pickle in December and has only been saved by the vaccine bounce. The GBP are rewarding and punishing the government reasonably rationally for successes and failures. We're not quite at Latin American standards, even Italian standards, yet. And this government is likely to fail more than it succeeds, because it has BoJo at its head and lickspittles under him.
Second, events. Although BoJo and co are hollow enough to ignore scandals that would have felled other politicians, funny things can happen. Think back to the expenses scandal. One of the key phrases that people remember from that time is "Duck House". Now Sir Peter Viggers was the MP for my hometown. Career had been over in the 1980s really, should have retired in 2001, but decent cove and mostly harmless. I delivered leaflets for him back in the day. He was far from the worst sinner in the scandal (I think he never got the money for the damn thing) but something about the absurdity of him asking if he could claim for a duck house cut through with the public in a way that worse examples of greed didn't. This scandal, or one of the many that are surely in the pipeline, has the potential for something really trivial that causes the public to turn. Because the public are like that.
Few give a monkeys whether you are prepared to "forgive" the Royal Family" It is yet another attempt to grab the limelight.
Kindly go away and annoy someone else (as you surely will).
Thank you
SR2
You seem obsessed with The Duchess of Sussex.
What do you make of this though?
PRINCE Andrew reportedly told the Queen he wished to dress in Admiral uniform for Prince Philip's funeral - despite deferring the title after the Jeffrey Epstein sex scandal.
The Duke of York, who stepped back from public duties over his friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein 18 months ago, was made an honorary Vice-Admiral in the Royal Navy on his 55th birthday in 2015.
Time to ditch the lot of it. Tony Benn was absolutely right - the whole point of all this nonsense is to convey the message to the public that these people are so "important" that they must be deferred to and so that nobody will challenge their privileges.
There are plenty of valid arguments to be made in favour of republicanism, but practically no public interest in actually implementing it.
I am not sure about Andrew. He seems to have been very foolish.. Best to keep.out of the limelight,.. just like Ms Markle should. I am actually angrier with Harry for allowing the broadcast to happen.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
A feather in his cap then.
This looks different to previous misdemeanors like Jenrick and the pornographer. It ties some of the earlier accusations against the Johnson Government together. Johnson's popularity is riding high at present, and he seems content for Cameron to take the fall, however when the government starts to struggle, which is inevitable, and another minor scandal hits the headlines, this one will be dredged up, and its effect will gain traction.
Yes, it is a feather in his cap (as was his suspension of Jeremy Corbyn from the party) and he clearly has ethical integrity.
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
Tory sleaze proved to be a winner for LAB at the end of the Major government. And Starmer did well today getting that message across.
The trouble is that by the end of the last Labour government it was largely Labour MPs being charged and imprisoned for fraud.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
So you are saying he busts crims without favour? That's probably the most positive thing said about him on here for weeks.
As DPP, one would hope so. The point is that Labour sleaze is as prevalent as the Tory type, and voters don't distinguish, so the impact on voting intention is minimal.
Nah, it is sleaze in government that bothers them. "Chuck 'em out, the scoundrels" applies to governments not oppositions.
So if, according to you, the government is so very sleazy, why do the voters appear not to give a toss about it?
Sleaze is a slow burner, a corrosive decay, but once it takes hold in the public's mind, it is very hard to reverse. I wouldn't expect the polls to change much this year.
The achillies heel of the government is that Johnson is incapable of acting on sleaze. He is blind to it, because honesty is so alien to him, and he likes to be popular by doing favours for chums.
Few give a monkeys whether you are prepared to "forgive" the Royal Family" It is yet another attempt to grab the limelight.
Kindly go away and annoy someone else (as you surely will).
Thank you
SR2
You seem obsessed with The Duchess of Sussex.
What do you make of this though?
PRINCE Andrew reportedly told the Queen he wished to dress in Admiral uniform for Prince Philip's funeral - despite deferring the title after the Jeffrey Epstein sex scandal.
The Duke of York, who stepped back from public duties over his friendship with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein 18 months ago, was made an honorary Vice-Admiral in the Royal Navy on his 55th birthday in 2015.
Unbelievable. In what dark recess of his tiny brain does Andrew think he merits the uniform of Admiral?
I think he's currently entitled to Vice Admiral as honorary rank (Senior Royal?). Due to his own service it is Commander. Was due for Admiral on is 60th Birthday but it got sat on.
Comments
https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1382364816828948484
If the Brexit Project works- if it makes people happier, more prosperous and more in control of their lives- it will stick.
If it doesn't, it won't.
https://twitter.com/RobHarris/status/1382400805500764163
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&u=https://datadashboard.health.gov.il/COVID-19/general
I presume there's been comment on the new London Mayoral polling from Opinium.
Sadiq Khan will be relaxed with a rating of 51% (-2) while Bailey (29%), Berry and Porritt (both 8%) are all up a point but this is margin of error stuff.
Khan beats Bailey 64-36 in a run off (Khan down 2, Bailey up 2).
Q: What is the difference between Koo Stark and the Argies?
A: Only one managed to blow up Andrew's chopper.
Is that my coat?
It ends in... dessert.
90+ 98.7%
80-89 95.4%
70-79 97.9%
60-69 89.5%
50-59 88.3%
40-49 83.6%
30-39 79.3%
20-29 75%
10-19 21.7%
0-9 0%
Gives 57.41% overall
I think the Greensill affair will go the way of Salmond, bogged down in detail that bores the public. It will leave behind a stink but not a fatal one.
We just expect politicians to shovel money to their mates nowadays. We are in the age of a gilded kleptocracy, which is pretty much where populist governments wind up.
The politest comment I can think of is is that he is utterly tin-eared
Some years ago, RN's Spearfish torpedos came due for a mid life overhaul/upgrade.
Spearfish is an example of a weapon that is made in the UK and is actually pretty good.
One of the companies involved in building them put in a bid to go the maintenance on the hydraulics. Because of the compact design of the systems to fit in the torpedo, the hydraulics were one of kind. It turned out that when developing them for the torpedo, the company in question had used a cunning and fairly standard tactic. They had spent some of their own money on tools and designs. So they owned the IP.
This meant that only they could do the work. The bid they put in for the maintenance work was... impressive.
A couple of bright sparks at the MoD realised that technology had moved on. They worked out that you could replace the hydraulic systems in the torpedo with electrical actuators. Which were cheaper, safer (no liquids at a zillion psi) and practically maintenance free. Oh, and lighter. The cost of replacement was a fraction of the cost of the upgrade of the hydraulics.
The response was this - an attempt by civil servants and politicians to get the electrical upgrade binned and the the people responsible fired. On the grounds of "protecting the industrial base".
Both the civil servants and politicians involved were... connected to the company in question.
The upgrade to use the electrical system went ahead, IIRC.
https://twitter.com/leicesterucu/status/1382357112605581314?s=19
Interesting times in the university sector. Financially stretched, mutinous staff, fed up domestic students, no lucrative overseas students etc.
Are they vaccination down to 16?
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-childrens-doctors-to-issue-call-to-vaccinate-under-16s/
One other thing to note is pregnant women are included in their rollout whereas it is limited for the UK
https://www.jpost.com/health-science/coronavirus-israel-right-to-vaccinate-pregnant-women-experts-say-656919
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/apr/14/single-pfizer-or-astrazeneca-dose-produces-strong-antibody-response-study-shows
First, the government was in a significant pickle in December and has only been saved by the vaccine bounce. The GBP are rewarding and punishing the government reasonably rationally for successes and failures. We're not quite at Latin American standards, even Italian standards, yet. And this government is likely to fail more than it succeeds, because it has BoJo at its head and lickspittles under him.
Second, events. Although BoJo and co are hollow enough to ignore scandals that would have felled other politicians, funny things can happen. Think back to the expenses scandal. One of the key phrases that people remember from that time is "Duck House". Now Sir Peter Viggers was the MP for my hometown. Career had been over in the 1980s really, should have retired in 2001, but decent cove and mostly harmless. I delivered leaflets for him back in the day. He was far from the worst sinner in the scandal (I think he never got the money for the damn thing) but something about the absurdity of him asking if he could claim for a duck house cut through with the public in a way that worse examples of greed didn't. This scandal, or one of the many that are surely in the pipeline, has the potential for something really trivial that causes the public to turn. Because the public are like that.
Astra is a great vaccine for preventing severe disease but we're past that and could probably hit sterlising immunity with other vaccines, particularly mRNA. Boosters of a different type in the Autumn would be a great idea I think - over 50 prior Astra with an mRNA or Novavax and mix and match 2nd dosing would push us up higher.
Right now I have us at a restriction free stopping r(0) from both viruses and infections of 2. Paediatric approval for mRNA vaccines would be fab too.
"Europe" isn't the future as it looked in the 1970s, and the international challenges we face now can only be solved globally.
There must be Trumpian levels of self-delusion involved.
There's been great competence since then which is how we managed to get a revised Brexit agreement, a trade deal and world beating vaccinations.
And do you know who charged them?
Keir Starmer.
They are only standing in 11 constituencies. They'd be on an average of 26% of the vote in each constituency if that was the case.
Perhaps arguing isn't the right word - those who are anti-LD will doubtless witter on about it for as long as the Conservatives used to mention the "Winter of Discontent" regarding Labour.
In other words, long after most people have forgotten about it or stopped caring about it.
When they look at the ballot paper and there is no Scottish Green, who do you think they will go for? SNP surely?
Simply going into coalition with the Tories broke the Lib Dems in the eyes of many voters.
In 2010 they got 18.9% of the vote in Scotland, in 2011 they got 8% - losing over half their vote. This was not down to failing to own their record in government.
Those 2 points are very fungible voters.
The George Galloway vehicle on 2% is also scarcely believable (at least it is down from the ludicrous 4% from last time).
The entire Panelbase poll is deeply suspect - at least they aren't prompting with Alex Salmond's name this time out.
Inexcusable on every level.
Made the PM look dodgy as hell
Hope it leads to a bounce for PV deadline but one swallow a summer does not make so not overly hopeful
Shelf stacker is still a relevant term, though in some places it has been 'remanufactured' as "Night Replenishment Assistant".
By going into office with the Tories they lost their left-leaning supporters.
By disowning and seeming to be embarrassed by their record they lost their right-leaning supporters.
Are they trying to be a party of national govt?
Is it a movement to retain a liberal voice in discourse?
Is it about another coalition?
Is it about local government?
It seems to try to do a bit of everything without much focus, and therefore is failing at everything.
Two big gripes from me would be as said not being proud of its record in govt and secondly not supporting any of the indicative votes in the Brexit process which would have saved us from "Boris" and his authoritarian kleptocracy.
One of those chunks of vote was always going to go up in smoke in any hung parliament scenario. Different decisions in 2010 might have saved some of it, but not much.
You should do what I did and not watch any of it.
This looks different to previous misdemeanors like Jenrick and the pornographer. It ties some of the earlier accusations against the Johnson Government together. Johnson's popularity is riding high at present, and he seems content for Cameron to take the fall, however when the government starts to struggle, which is inevitable, and another minor scandal hits the headlines, this one will be dredged up, and its effect will gain traction.
Makes him come across like a pantomime version of Kaiser Bill.
Or a refugee from Colonel Blimp.
No-one believes that of today's Labour.
But, can he transform the whole of Labour?
The achillies heel of the government is that Johnson is incapable of acting on sleaze. He is blind to it, because honesty is so alien to him, and he likes to be popular by doing favours for chums.
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/London/issue/61160/supplement/3798
He's being a fool trying to bugger with status at a Private Funeral.