So companies can work on becoming more efficient while paying a good wage, instead of relying upon importing people who are prepared to work for minimum wage - while claiming in-work benefits.
So yes, that was the point. Every HGV driver I know voted for Brexit.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Its about the first interesting thing Sir Bland has done. But its a screw up.
Taking the knee in his office in his shiny suit was interesting. But not in a good way.
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
I suspect that he is right
I’ll stick my neck out, and predict that knee-taking at sporting events doesn’t last many weeks once crowds are back in stadia.
The European Cup Final should of course be held at Wembley - although I have rather good memories of the last time it was held in Istanbul!
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
Actually it does. I have seen it in action. The sooner it is dealt with, both in terms of voter id and ending, under virtually all circumstances, absentee voting, the better.
As for voter id being used for creeping police statism, it’s happening everywhere. Nothing we can do about it.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
He's taken a hit. The story on the BBC front page of his 'messy' reshuffle pulls few punches. Talks about the Rayner difficulty and says something like 'this might surprise people who think hes supposed to be in charge'. Ouch.
He probably needs the battle now though, while the relative newness of his leadership, barely more than a year, means more think it too soon to switch.
He needs a battle to stamp his authority and personality. Whether he needs this battle is I think more uncertain. People are being thrown overboard and other anonymous crew are being brought on board but to what purpose and where is the ship actually going?
This is the problem. There is no leadership from him. What is his Shadow Chancellor supposed to say or dream up when there is no policy framework within which to do it? Dodds is clever and has been put in charge of policy development which in some ways is not actually a demotion because it is more urgent. Personally, I would have put Ed Miliband in charge of that since the government has implemented nearly all of his 2015 manifesto since but it will be interesting to see what she comes up with. I think we have all pretty much given up on SKS having any ideas of his own.
He had one idea, prevent Brexit in 2019, and he came up with lots of Parlimentary wheezes to do just that. What a great political move that was.
As our politics becomes ever more values based rather than economically driven SKS seems on the same side as the majority of Labour membership (professional, university educated, public sector in the main, highly aware of the nuances of sexual, racial and gender politics, remainer), but a million miles away from what used to be the majority of Labour voters.
What we saw on Thursday is that they have noticed and are not impressed. Where there are more of the type that form the Labour membership, mainly in the south and in places like Cambridge, he did much better. But how does he get a majority out of that? And can Labour survive as a party if it leaves its traditional base behind?
The most depressing thing Ive heard over the weekend is Gordon Brown has decided he's going to save the Union. Its the first time Ive thought the UK will split up, the man is a fecal Midas.
Still well respected in Scotland, which is where the 'saving' has to be done.
If Brown hadn't knee capped Wendy Alexander there would have been a 2009 Referendum with Brown leading the No side. In the midst of the GFC.
Despite attempting to can Angela Rayner, after a day of tense talks she emerged with the title: Deputy Leader, Shadow First Secretary of State, Shadow Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and Shadow Secretary of State for the Future of Work.
Her allies said the multiple jobs added up to a promotion, but Starmer's supporters rejected that as "spin."
Its about the first interesting thing Sir Bland has done. But its a screw up.
Taking the knee in his office in his shiny suit was interesting. But not in a good way.
I was chatting to a friend about moving the European Cup Final to Wembley and he said that had full stadiums continued through covid the fans would not have supported the gesture and made it known
I suspect that he is right
I’ll stick my neck out, and predict that knee-taking at sporting events doesn’t last many weeks once crowds are back in stadia.
The European Cup Final should of course be held at Wembley - although I have rather good memories of the last time it was held in Istanbul!
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
Actually it does. I have seen it in action. The sooner it is dealt with, both in terms of voter id and ending, under virtually all circumstances, absentee voting, the better.
As for voter id being used for creeping police statism, it’s happening everywhere. Nothing we can do about it.
Were you one of the 20 cases that the police investigated or did you act as an accomplice by not reporting it.
It will likely mean higher wages which will eventually mean higher prices. But if people are earning more that might not matter
What is interesting, here, is the echo of the Black Death. One of the most famous and unexpected consequences of the Black Death was the emancipation of millions of serfs, who - thanks to acute labour shortages due to the millions of dead - were finally able to up sticks, quit the village, and go find better wages. Which they did
Plagues have strangely positive effects, amid the generalized horror
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
Another way of looking at it is that the nationalists went backwards in both Wales and Scotland.
Rumours of the death of the UK have been greatly exaggerated.
How have the nationalists gone backwards in Scotland? Record turnout. Highest ever vote for the SNP. Highest ever majority of Yes MSPs.
In 2037 there will be a weird shortage of that pasta that looks like tiny butterflies, and ScottxP will eagerly rush on here to brandish it as final proof of the Great Folly of Brexit, hoping to see it reversed
In 2037 there will be a weird shortage of that pasta that looks like tiny butterflies, and ScottxP will eagerly rush on here to brandish it as final proof of the Great Folly of Brexit, hoping to see it reversed
In 2037 there will be a weird shortage of that pasta that looks like tiny butterflies, and ScottxP will eagerly rush on here to brandish it as final proof of the Great Folly of Brexit, hoping to see it reversed
In 2037 there will be a weird shortage of that pasta that looks like tiny butterflies, and ScottxP will eagerly rush on here to brandish it as final proof of the Great Folly of Brexit, hoping to see it reversed
A most encouraging paper suggesting the durability and broad coverage against variants of the immune response. (It being very likely that vaccine and booster shot(s) will have a similar effect.)
Vaccination boosts naturally enhanced neutralizing breadth to SARS-CoV-2 one year after infection https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.07.443175v1 Over one year after its inception, the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains difficult to control despite the availability of several excellent vaccines. Progress in controlling the pandemic is slowed by the emergence of variants that appear to be more transmissible and more resistant to antibodies. Here we report on a cohort of 63 COVID-19-convalescent individuals assessed at 1.3, 6.2 and 12 months after infection, 41% of whom also received mRNA vaccines. In the absence of vaccination antibody reactivity to the receptor binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2, neutralizing activity and the number of RBD-specific memory B cells remain relatively stable from 6 to 12 months. Vaccination increases all components of the humoral response, and as expected, results in serum neutralizing activities against variants of concern that are comparable to or greater than neutralizing activity against the original Wuhan Hu-1 achieved by vaccination of naive individuals. The mechanism underlying these broad-based responses involves ongoing antibody somatic mutation, memory B cell clonal turnover, and development of monoclonal antibodies that are exceptionally resistant to SARS-CoV-2 RBD mutations, including those found in variants of concern. In addition, B cell clones expressing broad and potent antibodies are selectively retained in the repertoire over time and expand dramatically after vaccination. The data suggest that immunity in convalescent individuals will be very long lasting and that convalescent individuals who receive available mRNA vaccines will produce antibodies and memory B cells that should be protective against circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants. Should memory responses evolve in a similar manner in vaccinated individuals, additional appropriately timed boosting with available vaccines could cover most circulating variants of concern.
With his majority he should stop being frit on a few things and go for it - planning changes looked dead due to local opposition but after this week they should feel better.
But he needs to get a grip on social care already.
He risks seriously upsetting voters in the South who are fed up with huge estates being built .
"Risks" is putting it mildly. That's arguably the single biggest factor behind the Tories losing Oxfordshire yesterday.
HMG is at least talking about building in the north, though the risk is that a bonfire of regulations will mean more ticky-tacky in the south-east. Investment in new housing and even new towns should be directed up north and wherever else the local economy needs rejuvenation.
Up North we don't need houses - that's a southern issue.
There is a simple test to housing - are houses prices above 2004 levels - if so you haven't built enough.
Surely there are towns where you can find an entire street given away in a box of cornflakes? HMG should refurbish or replace them and then (almost) give them away, in order to stimulate the local economy.
In the south-east and particularly in London there are huge distortions caused by posh homes being bought off plan as investments, often from overseas, displacing people outwards if they are left empty or replacing ownership with private tenancies.
Nope - they were all sold for £50k plus a decade or so back to southerns wanting to make money from BTL..
If you are lucky enough to get a tenant who isn't into stealing boilers a LHA rate of £550 a month generates a decent return.
Doesn’t really work now though. The risk / return is smaller and the tax implications are much harsher and quite unfair with how interest is managed.
The BTL millionaires people are the ones who bought the houses for 30% of what they are worth now.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's quite transparent why they are doing so. A day after the Conservatives lose but two mayoralties they decide, let's change the system to our advantage.
I have a feeling that once the Covid dust settles, these sort of Dick Dastardly scams will blow up in their faces.
The only reason we have the Supplementary Vote system for Mayoral elections, rather than AV, is that SV is better for Labour than AV. It was a scam in the first place.
I prefer a Labour scam to a Tory one, but the status quo is short of a democratic ideal.
Given that 1/6 of votes in London were cast incorrectly SV seems too complex for the benefits it offers.
Much of the problem is the move to preferential voting systems whilst trying to hang onto the X in a box.
Numbering candidates 1,2,3 is perfectly straightforward, and something people easily understand. If the government would only drop its irrational resistance to preferential voting, there'd be much less resistance to change - if your job is simply to find the candidate you like best and put a "1" beside their name, the layout and columns of the ballot paper are much less likely to lead people astray.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's quite transparent why they are doing so. A day after the Conservatives lose but two mayoralties they decide, let's change the system to our advantage.
I have a feeling that once the Covid dust settles, these sort of Dick Dastardly scams will blow up in their faces.
The only reason we have the Supplementary Vote system for Mayoral elections, rather than AV, is that SV is better for Labour than AV. It was a scam in the first place.
I prefer a Labour scam to a Tory one, but the status quo is short of a democratic ideal.
Given that 1/6 of votes in London were cast incorrectly SV seems too complex for the benefits it offers.
The problem with the London Mayor election was not the voting system but the confusing design of the ballot paper, as explored on previous threads.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
I'd think that's a very easy question.
The 2 docs you mention, plus perhaps certain that require a strong checking process to obtain and are secure documents.
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
Another way of looking at it is that the nationalists went backwards in both Wales and Scotland.
Rumours of the death of the UK have been greatly exaggerated.
How have the nationalists gone backwards in Scotland? Record turnout. Highest ever vote for the SNP. Highest ever majority of Yes MSPs.
Yesterdays polling with remain on 58% v leave 42% and only one in eight Scots think it is a priority issue confirmed the recent trend away from independence
Furthermore, I really do think Sturgeon only values her own legacy, and she will not gamble it without a clear majority of Scots demanding it, and that is not the same as a SNP/Green alliance promoting it
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
You really do come across as just plainly bitter
About what? I am (a) not pushing for Labour and (b) not that bothered about the Tories dominating England having left the country.
Engage on the point. The Tories would have had a tough year had it not been for Covid. The effective bribe money on offer to Hartlepool voters wouldn't have been there without Covid.
Untrue. Towns deal, future night street fund, levelling up funds. These are all pre covid town investment programmes.
Give over. Thats a sticking plaster at best. The towns deal at best pays for one project in one of the winning towns. And "levelling up funds" are what exactly? These areas needed hosing with cash - happened because of Covid and wouldn't have happened otherwise.
How can I say this with confidence? Because Mansfield. One of the early blue wins in the wall. Has had an enormous £12m. Wow! That will make all the difference...
Yes £12m is a lot of money. If you think it isn't then it goes to show that nothing will ever be good enough.
"Hosing with cash" isn't a solution either, what's needed is to create the conditions that allow for further growth, which creates a virtuous positive feedback loop.
When it comes to town centre improvements £12m really doesn't go very far.
For instance Middlesbrough Station is getting £35m and that really is a small station. Darlington Bank Top is getting £105m - so it's refurbished prior to the 2025 celebrations.
Boro station is a classic piece of Houchenism. Virgin/LNER have services to Boro as part of their legal franchise obligations. Network Rail need to deliver some infrastructure upgrades to allow 5 car 130m trains to stable, it took a while, Houchen then claims personal credit for bringing London trains to Middlesbrough.
I challenged him directly on Twitter about it - he insisted that it took him to co-ordinate for it to happen. Despite him having zero impact on the legal obligation to deliver the services, on Network Rail or on Middlesbrough Council.
Anyway the big news today and I hope everyone is looking forward to it as much as I am - the Prime Minister telling us whether we are going to be allowed to hug our families.
Be still my beating heart...
Haven't seen my parents in 15 months. Expected them to die if they got Covid. Trust me, there are many of us whose heart is absolutely beating at the prospect of a hug from their mum.
And you need the PM to explain to you the relevant risks?
If you haven't seen your parents in 15 months that is on you. Isolate yourself for 14 days and go to see them.
I haven't seen them for 15 months because we were in lockdown, then they were shielding, then they were in lockdown then we all were in lockdown. For old people in the North West lockdown has been a permanent feature.
Yes, we could have binned off the regulations. I could have seen them. I could have killed them - as we saw with the kill your Granny christmas amnesty and the monster spike through January.
I can isolate myself. I can't isolate my kids or my teaching assistant wife. And Pox spread like wildfire through schools.
Mate I feel for you really I do. Must have been terrible.
But you could have gone to see your parents if you managed it appropriately. If you had wanted to see them you could have seen them.
And newsflash - even with vaccines (90-95% efficacy?) the virus will be about and hence people will need to be aware of the risks after May 17th. Are you planning to go to see your parents on May 18th? Like it's all of a sudden safe?
For a number of reasons the govt has put the fear of bejeezus into the country about this so that BoJo can come onto our screens and pronounce himself as the bringer of hugs.
Meanwhile everyone had the option to think through the risks, based upon the available evidence, the whole time.
I offered that as an option several times - they declined. And I understand why. I'm not going there on the first day because its suddenly safe (as thay would be stupid). I am organising a trip now that they have had both doses and I have had one and the pox is back down to minor numbers.
The chance of me killing my dad has dropped sufficiently to make it ok. I don't get though how I could have managed it appropriately? Even last summer when a version of normal returned briefly they were either shielding or locked down due to the pox running rampant in the NW. And at my end with wife and kids in school there was no way to isolate myself from it.
This is part of the issue - some pensioners are sticklers for the rules. I last saw my parents in October and we actually ended up staying with them when it was illegal, but that only happened because we arrived on Thursday (as planned a number of weeks before), it was announced late Thursday or early Friday that they were back in lockdown with no overnight stays from midnight Friday and we left - as planned - on Sunday. I'm pretty sure they'd have stopped us coming if the rule change had been announced before we came down. Even then, they were a wee bit twitchy about what the neighbours would think.
All personal choice, of course. But we're next down the weekend after 17 May when going into their house becomes legal again, because I don't think they'd have let us otherwise. We could have gone down and met them outside, but they're at an age where that is very weather/temperature dependent.
For a lot of people, 17 May is a big thing, even though the date itself is clearly somewhat arbitrary.
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
Another way of looking at it is that the nationalists went backwards in both Wales and Scotland.
Rumours of the death of the UK have been greatly exaggerated.
How have the nationalists gone backwards in Scotland? Record turnout. Highest ever vote for the SNP. Highest ever majority of Yes MSPs.
Biggest ever vote for the Tories. SNP failed to get a majority despite huge pandemic boost. Super nationalists Alba completely cratered.
Another fantasist running away from the reality of how people voted. Happily you have zero relevance to events!
I made three assertions. All are factually true
They are! But they do not negate the result of the election which was a win for Yes who now have both the majority and the mandate to push for a new referendum.
Unionists would win an Indyref if it was held tommorow. If it is blocked, that could well create the neccessary support for it in the longer run
No guarantee of that, it would be about 50% Yes 50% No based on Thursday's results.
Nationalists would also demand indyref3 the day after having cut the No lead from 2014 even if No narrowly won, the UK government having been so weak as to allow indyref2 before a generation had elapsed since indyref1.
Quebec's 51% No vote in its second independence referendum in 1995 only settled the issue, despite the narrow margin, as it was held 15 years after the first referendum in 1980 ie a genuine generation and had devomax for the Quebec Parliament added on too
It will likely mean higher wages which will eventually mean higher prices. But if people are earning more that might not matter
What is interesting, here, is the echo of the Black Death. One of the most famous and unexpected consequences of the Black Death was the emancipation of millions of serfs, who - thanks to acute labour shortages due to the millions of dead - were finally able to up sticks, quit the village, and go find better wages. Which they did
Plagues have strangely positive effects, amid the generalized horror
I think what's more interesting is that this is another example of the old arguments about EU immigration not holding back working class wages being smashed to bits. The whole remain campaign was built on nothing.
Unionists would win an Indyref if it was held tommorow. If it is blocked, that could well create the neccessary support for it in the longer run
I'd settle for Dundee and the East end of Glasgow setting up their own Balkan style Natty states and that would be the end of the Indy question. I'm sure UEFA would let them join.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
I'd think that's a very easy question.
The 2 docs you mention, plus perhaps certain that require a strong checking process to obtain and are secure documents.
If voting needs a passport and driving licence, what about all the people who neither drive nor take foreign holidays?
A new shadow is struggling on R4. Gabbling nonsense frankly under pressure from Robinson.
A cracking start then...
Yes, heard it. Not great. Time for a reshuffle.
Of policies.
Every Lab person on the airwaves has said how Lab must change. But none has answered the question - what was wrong before and what would you do different in future.
Yes, the leader is important. So is the team. Also the tone, the visuals, message discipline, media management, organization, all of that. But policies are key. They'll tell us (I hope) what Labour under Starmer are about. It's a massive challenge - with the WWC going bad - but it's also a great opportunity. I'm really looking forward to seeing what comes forth. I'm going to submit some ideas myself, in fact. I have some terrific ones.
Can hardly wait. Forget the hugging thing.
What did Lab do wrong previously that you would have them change?
In a nutshell, I think we need more velvet glove around the iron fist.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
I'd think that's a very easy question.
The 2 docs you mention, plus perhaps certain that require a strong checking process to obtain and are secure documents.
If voting needs a passport and driving licence, what about all the people who neither drive nor take foreign holidays?
How do they pick up parcels from the Post Office ?
Parliamentary Standards Commissioner Kathryn Stone confirms Boris Johnson is one of nine MPs under investigation for alleged breaches of the rules. She is looking at his Mustique holiday, alleged misuse of official stationery, but not, as yet, his curtains https://tinyurl.com/433fpxj9
It will likely mean higher wages which will eventually mean higher prices. But if people are earning more that might not matter
What is interesting, here, is the echo of the Black Death. One of the most famous and unexpected consequences of the Black Death was the emancipation of millions of serfs, who - thanks to acute labour shortages due to the millions of dead - were finally able to up sticks, quit the village, and go find better wages. Which they did
Plagues have strangely positive effects, amid the generalized horror
I think what's more interesting is that this is another example of the old arguments about EU immigration not holding back working class wages being smashed to bits. The whole remain campaign was built on nothing.
Lord Rose was not widely used by Remain after this:
Labour MP Wes Streeting asked Lord Rose, the head of the pro-EU campaign group Britain Stronger in Europe, whether leaving the EU would result in a rise in wages for low-skilled workers in the UK.
The former M&S boss agreed that any restriction in available labour could lead to such an increase, before adding - at a Treasury select committee session - "that's not necessarily a good thing".
Laurence Fox latest: "Dear @metpoliceuk Please stop harassing my house and my children yet AGAIN. It makes them cry. It’s bang out of order. You’re Thugs." "If you come to my house again for no reason. There will be trouble."
Scott n Paste sounds like a lot of the Brexit people he hates saying you just wait it will all change, the mines will be reopened, everything made in the UK again like the 50/60s, we will ban everything from China.
For better or worse, Brexit isn't being reversed. Just thinking rationally, Tories likely to win 2024 / Labour certainly not running on reversing Brexit and I think highly likely nobody risks going near it again in 2029. So thats 2034 before the Lib whos sweep into power or something...
There was a small window where it might have been stopped (I think that would have led to even more trouble), but that has passed.
Times: "An ally claimed she was effectively the boss of Dodds, as party chairwoman, and Shabana Mahmood, the new campaign co-ordinator. This was flatly denied by Starmer’s supporters, and Rayner’s camp eventually backed down". This underlines who's been playing games.
What's the issue that the voters are going to vote against the government upon?
If there's a shortage of drivers then hire drivers, and pay them a decent wage.
Maybe some Deliveroo style drivers might want to train to be HGV drivers if offered a decent wage for doing the job.
It will make sod all difference politically. Lets look at the "pay a decent wage" argument - which I support btw.
Hauliers cannot pass on the additional costs of higher wages as supermarkets won't accept them and consumers won't pay them British workers don't want to be truck drivers in sufficient numbers - hours and being away from home as much of an issue as wages Foreign drivers therefore step in. Until Brexit removes their right to work here.
So we go back to slogans. "Pay them more" doesn't work. "British jobs for British workers" doesn't work. So we muddle along until the supply chain falls over, people finally notice and the blame of Patel not putting drivers on the shortage occupation list rightly falls on the EU.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
I'd think that's a very easy question.
The 2 docs you mention, plus perhaps certain that require a strong checking process to obtain and are secure documents.
If voting needs a passport and driving licence, what about all the people who neither drive nor take foreign holidays?
How do they pick up parcels from the Post Office ?
The Post Office does not require a passport or driving licence. Just as well, since many people have neither.
Starmer's interview mid-results was such an error. Should have said we're waiting till all the results come in instead of panicing like a deer in headlights. Manchester, West of England, Wales and the south were all better for Labour - not that it makes up for their wholesale shipping of support in the north and Midlands.
For better or worse, Brexit isn't being reversed. Just thinking rationally, Tories likely to win 2024 / Labour certainly not running on reversing Brexit and I think highly likely nobody risks going near it again in 2029.
As the tide of Covid recedes, the wreckage of Brexit is revealed.
The primary job of Government is going to be repairing the damage.
They are already desperately trying to reopen the Irish deal. What other aspects of Brexit will they try and reverse fix ?
In the trial on voting ID held a year or two ago there were literally dozens of accepted forms, including one you could request, for free, from your local council if you didn't have any of the others.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
I'd think that's a very easy question.
The 2 docs you mention, plus perhaps certain that require a strong checking process to obtain and are secure documents.
If voting needs a passport and driving licence, what about all the people who neither drive nor take foreign holidays?
How do they pick up parcels from the Post Office ?
The Post Office does not require a passport or driving licence. Just as well, since many people have neither.
Post office works on name from a bank card or similar.
In 2037 there will be a weird shortage of that pasta that looks like tiny butterflies, and ScottxP will eagerly rush on here to brandish it as final proof of the Great Folly of Brexit, hoping to see it reversed
So companies can work on becoming more efficient while paying a good wage, instead of relying upon importing people who are prepared to work for minimum wage - while claiming in-work benefits.
So yes, that was the point. Every HGV driver I know voted for Brexit.
Of course they did! Remove the foreign drivers and they can pick their jobs thanks to the resulting shortage of drivers.
Doesn't resolve the shortage of drivers and the impact it creates though...
For better or worse, Brexit isn't being reversed. Just thinking rationally, Tories likely to win 2024 / Labour certainly not running on reversing Brexit and I think highly likely nobody risks going near it again in 2029.
As the tide of Covid recedes, the wreckage of Brexit is revealed.
The primary job of Government is going to be repairing the damage.
They are already desperately trying to reopen the Irish deal. What other aspects of Brexit will they try and reverse fix ?
You really are deluded. It not happening. Brexit isn't going to be reversed. And anybody who proposes it, the tale of the great vaccine scandal of 2021 will soon put an end to that. That is the final nail in the coffin, how the EU mishandled it and then their absolutely disgusting behaviour towards the UK.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
I'd think that's a very easy question.
The 2 docs you mention, plus perhaps certain that require a strong checking process to obtain and are secure documents.
If voting needs a passport and driving licence, what about all the people who neither drive nor take foreign holidays?
How do they pick up parcels from the Post Office ?
I have had to pick up a parcel from the Post Office once in the last 25 years. I brought an envelope with my address on it on that occasion and they handed it over.
However...
There is no significant voter fraud in this country. I don't understand how this legislation can be interpreted or defended as anything other than a piece of attempted voter suppression? There's no problem to fix. The "fix" causes problems. The "conservative" approach (for the Conservatives of the old days) would be to *not interfere with the status quo*.
In the trial on voting ID held a year or two ago there were literally dozens of accepted forms, including one you could request, for free, from your local council if you didn't have any of the others.
So affluent voters can vote as normal, and less affluent voters can also vote but only after jumping through hoops a few days earlier. Let's think which parties that might favour.
What's the issue that the voters are going to vote against the government upon?
If there's a shortage of drivers then hire drivers, and pay them a decent wage.
Maybe some Deliveroo style drivers might want to train to be HGV drivers if offered a decent wage for doing the job.
It will make sod all difference politically. Lets look at the "pay a decent wage" argument - which I support btw.
Hauliers cannot pass on the additional costs of higher wages as supermarkets won't accept them and consumers won't pay them British workers don't want to be truck drivers in sufficient numbers - hours and being away from home as much of an issue as wages Foreign drivers therefore step in. Until Brexit removes their right to work here.
So we go back to slogans. "Pay them more" doesn't work. "British jobs for British workers" doesn't work. So we muddle along until the supply chain falls over, people finally notice and the blame of Patel not putting drivers on the shortage occupation list rightly falls on the EU.
You also have (as I mentioned before) the impact of IR35 - a lot of agency drivers have seen their income drop 20-30% since April once the tricks agencies were using to avoid PAYE became impossible to use.
In the trial on voting ID held a year or two ago there were literally dozens of accepted forms, including one you could request, for free, from your local council if you didn't have any of the others.
So affluent voters can vote as normal, and less affluent voters can also vote but only after jumping through hoops a few days earlier. Let's think which parties that might favour.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
I'd think that's a very easy question.
The 2 docs you mention, plus perhaps certain that require a strong checking process to obtain and are secure documents.
If voting needs a passport and driving licence, what about all the people who neither drive nor take foreign holidays?
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
I'd think that's a very easy question.
The 2 docs you mention, plus perhaps certain that require a strong checking process to obtain and are secure documents.
If voting needs a passport and driving licence, what about all the people who neither drive nor take foreign holidays?
How do they pick up parcels from the Post Office ?
I have had to pick up a parcel from the Post Office once in the last 25 years. I brought an envelope with my address on it on that occasion and they handed it over.
However...
There is no significant voter fraud in this country. I don't understand how this legislation can be interpreted or defended as anything other than a piece of attempted voter suppression? There's no problem to fix. The "fix" causes problems. The "conservative" approach (for the Conservatives of the old days) would be to *not interfere with the status quo*.
While I tend to agree that there's probably not a big problem.... How do we know there's no significant voter fraud? How would we know? Other than lots of people turning up to discover that htey'd already voted? If you knew a group of people who were very unlikely to vote, then you could rock up at the polling stations and take their votes.
(I also tend to take the view that we should have evidence of a problem before trying to fix it).
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
Another way of looking at it is that the nationalists went backwards in both Wales and Scotland.
Rumours of the death of the UK have been greatly exaggerated.
How have the nationalists gone backwards in Scotland? Record turnout. Highest ever vote for the SNP. Highest ever majority of Yes MSPs.
Yesterdays polling with remain on 58% v leave 42% and only one in eight Scots think it is a priority issue confirmed the recent trend away from independence
Furthermore, I really do think Sturgeon only values her own legacy, and she will not gamble it without a clear majority of Scots demanding it, and that is not the same as a SNP/Green alliance promoting it
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
You really do come across as just plainly bitter
About what? I am (a) not pushing for Labour and (b) not that bothered about the Tories dominating England having left the country.
Engage on the point. The Tories would have had a tough year had it not been for Covid. The effective bribe money on offer to Hartlepool voters wouldn't have been there without Covid.
Untrue. Towns deal, future night street fund, levelling up funds. These are all pre covid town investment programmes.
Give over. Thats a sticking plaster at best. The towns deal at best pays for one project in one of the winning towns. And "levelling up funds" are what exactly? These areas needed hosing with cash - happened because of Covid and wouldn't have happened otherwise.
How can I say this with confidence? Because Mansfield. One of the early blue wins in the wall. Has had an enormous £12m. Wow! That will make all the difference...
Yes £12m is a lot of money. If you think it isn't then it goes to show that nothing will ever be good enough.
"Hosing with cash" isn't a solution either, what's needed is to create the conditions that allow for further growth, which creates a virtuous positive feedback loop.
When it comes to town centre improvements £12m really doesn't go very far.
For instance Middlesbrough Station is getting £35m and that really is a small station. Darlington Bank Top is getting £105m - so it's refurbished prior to the 2025 celebrations.
Boro station is a classic piece of Houchenism. Virgin/LNER have services to Boro as part of their legal franchise obligations. Network Rail need to deliver some infrastructure upgrades to allow 5 car 130m trains to stable, it took a while, Houchen then claims personal credit for bringing London trains to Middlesbrough.
I challenged him directly on Twitter about it - he insisted that it took him to co-ordinate for it to happen. Despite him having zero impact on the legal obligation to deliver the services, on Network Rail or on Middlesbrough Council.
Our mainline to London station (Alfreton) still does not have wheelchair access to both platforms. It was taken away before 1995.
Campaigning has been continuous by MPs, but it keeps getting cancelled or delayed after being agreed.
Don't underestimate the importance of a champion inside the loop.
On £12m, agree however you can do a lot with it in say a medium sized down.
And the EU will say no....then what....we aren't rejoining, certainly not for 15+ years. No political party with a chance at power will go near such a suggestion.
if you are in a FTA with a country you don't need the freeport side of things - it's only useful for imports / exports that you don't have a FTA agreement with.
While I tend to agree that there's probably not a big problem.... How do we know there's no significant voter fraud? How would we know? Other than lots of people turning up to discover that htey'd already voted? If you knew a group of people who were very unlikely to vote, then you could rock up at the polling stations and take their votes.
(I also tend to take the view that we should have evidence of a problem before trying to fix it).
A reminder that electoral fraud is a tiny problem. There were only 164 cases of any kind at the 2019 general election. Across all elections in 2019 the police found it necessary to issue a mere 2 cautions. Electoral Commission says UK has “low levels of proven electoral fraud.” https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1391687736915070977/photo/1
In 2037 there will be a weird shortage of that pasta that looks like tiny butterflies, and ScottxP will eagerly rush on here to brandish it as final proof of the Great Folly of Brexit, hoping to see it reversed
Future ages will hail him as the great Hiroo of the Brexit War...
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
I'd think that's a very easy question.
The 2 docs you mention, plus perhaps certain that require a strong checking process to obtain and are secure documents.
If voting needs a passport and driving licence, what about all the people who neither drive nor take foreign holidays?
How do they pick up parcels from the Post Office ?
The Post Office does not require a passport or driving licence. Just as well, since many people have neither.
Neither does this voting scheme - other forms are available.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's an expensive solution to a non existent problem. As of August 2020, one conviction and one caution had been secured for personation offences at elections held in 2019. There had been 20 allegations and the majority of cases led to no action....
A couple of orders of magnitude less than might be put off voting by this unnecessary scheme, very probably.
Any illegal vote represents the theft from another individual of their entire stake in democracy. If you want to trivialise it you should voluntarily disenfranchise yourself to show how trivial it is. Would you be happy with that!
That is absurd. Most of the stake in democracy does not come from the act of voting as an individual. My vote has never ever mattered at a GE because I havent lived in a marginal. My benefit in democracy comes from the fact that our leaders know they can be kicked out within a few years, and therefore to some extent have to reflect the priorities and mood of the country.
Things are the sum of their parts.
I take it you would be happy to be disenfranchised?
It would have made zero difference to my life if my personal vote had never counted, so it would not be a big deal, no.
Millions never ever vote but still benefit from democracy. I vote out of civic duty, not with any expectations of my vote actually counting or having any value under FPTP.
Unionists would win an Indyref if it was held tommorow. If it is blocked, that could well create the neccessary support for it in the longer run
No guarantee of that, it would be about 50% Yes 50% No based on Thursday's results.
Nationalists would also demand indyref3 the day after having cut the No lead from 2014 even if No narrowly won, the UK government having been so weak as to allow indyref2 before a generation had elapsed since indyref1.
Quebec's 51% No vote in its second independence referendum in 1995 only settled the issue, despite the narrow margin, as it was held 15 years after the first referendum in 1980 ie a genuine generation and had devomax for the Quebec Parliament added on too
I think No would win. The economics of Indy are truly terrible.
The 45% Yes vote in 2014 was based on both rUK and Scotland continuing in the EU (ie no trade barriers) and $100 oil. Both no longer apply. When confronted with questions on currency, borders, etc., Nicola really struggles, even after years of practice in developing answers. Very telling.
Fundamentally I think a number of Scots use voting SNP as a way of leveraging wonga out of Westminster, although most Yes voters apparently think Scotland is actually a net financial contributor to UK. Any future No campaign should focus on disabusing them of that misapprehension, preferably headed by some non-politicians.
While I tend to agree that there's probably not a big problem.... How do we know there's no significant voter fraud? How would we know? Other than lots of people turning up to discover that htey'd already voted? If you knew a group of people who were very unlikely to vote, then you could rock up at the polling stations and take their votes.
(I also tend to take the view that we should have evidence of a problem before trying to fix it).
A reminder that electoral fraud is a tiny problem. There were only 164 cases of any kind at the 2019 general election. Across all elections in 2019 the police found it necessary to issue a mere 2 cautions. Electoral Commission says UK has “low levels of proven electoral fraud.” https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1391687736915070977/photo/1
While I tend to agree that there's probably not a big problem.... How do we know there's no significant voter fraud? How would we know? Other than lots of people turning up to discover that htey'd already voted? If you knew a group of people who were very unlikely to vote, then you could rock up at the polling stations and take their votes.
(I also tend to take the view that we should have evidence of a problem before trying to fix it).
A reminder that electoral fraud is a tiny problem. There were only 164 cases of any kind at the 2019 general election. Across all elections in 2019 the police found it necessary to issue a mere 2 cautions. Electoral Commission says UK has “low levels of proven electoral fraud.” https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1391687736915070977/photo/1
Yep, "proven". If we didn't test for Covid we'd have no proven Covid deaths. What checks are carried out?
Where cases have arisen, I assume it's from someone turning up at the polling station and beng told they've voted already?
Scott. Brexit happened. Brexit is done. Brexit will not be reversed.
The stuff you are talking about are the things we have done after leaving the EU. Reversing some of the details of our post-EU trade deals is not reversing our departure from the EU.
As long it is as easy to get your free voter id as it is to register to vote (and it is incredibly easy, 2.mins on a website), I don't see the problem.
Its not like the UK is proposing anything like the outrageous type stuff that goes on in the US.
If you agree that Raynor has come out of these shenanigans stronger than ever then the 10/1 offered by Betway (Next Leader) sticks out a mile compared to other bookies. 5.4 with BF, for example.
While I tend to agree that there's probably not a big problem.... How do we know there's no significant voter fraud? How would we know? Other than lots of people turning up to discover that htey'd already voted? If you knew a group of people who were very unlikely to vote, then you could rock up at the polling stations and take their votes.
(I also tend to take the view that we should have evidence of a problem before trying to fix it).
A reminder that electoral fraud is a tiny problem. There were only 164 cases of any kind at the 2019 general election. Across all elections in 2019 the police found it necessary to issue a mere 2 cautions. Electoral Commission says UK has “low levels of proven electoral fraud.” https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1391687736915070977/photo/1
Only 164 detected.. fraud is much worse than that.
if you are in a FTA with a country you don't need the freeport side of things - it's only useful for imports / exports that you don't have a FTA agreement with.
I think the FT are referring to point of origin rules for re-exports but that's a known issue with Freeports. They're trying to manufacture yet another anti-brexit story for rubes like Scott whose existence depends on a drip feed of hope that brexit will somehow be reversed
Millions never ever vote but still benefit from democracy. I vote out of civic duty, not with any expectations of my vote actually counting or having any value under FPTP.
I think one of Labour's big problems is younger people are much less likely to vote out of civic duty and only do so if they feel it will make a difference. A galvanising leader can get more young labour votes out; the Tories don't have the same problem
But to be fair to the Scottish and Welsh First Ministers, Nicola Sturgeon and Mark Drakeford, they never challenged the way the vaccines were distributed. Whereas the Labour Party in England did. And we should not forget it — because it reveals something about why they have become so unpopular.
In January, the English Labour Party objected to the jabs schedule set out by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), which was to prioritise purely on the basis of risk of dying from Covid.
We were all ranked by age, eldest first — with only front-line health workers given higher priority, regardless of age. It was simple, fair and based on the best medical assessment of risk of death from Covid.
But Keir Starmer's Labour Party disagreed, and argued that all 'key workers' should be prioritised. Or, as its press release declared: 'Approximately 6.2 million key workers would benefit from being moved up the priority list.'
Doubtless they would. But the inevitable consequence, had Labour's policy been adopted, would have been to delay the vaccination of older, more vulnerable people, with, literally, fatal results. Needless, to say, all the 'key workers' Labour sought to prioritise were in the public sector, whose trade unions are the party's most significant financial backers. Follow the money.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's an expensive solution to a non existent problem. As of August 2020, one conviction and one caution had been secured for personation offences at elections held in 2019. There had been 20 allegations and the majority of cases led to no action....
A couple of orders of magnitude less than might be put off voting by this unnecessary scheme, very probably.
Any illegal vote represents the theft from another individual of their entire stake in democracy. If you want to trivialise it you should voluntarily disenfranchise yourself to show how trivial it is. Would you be happy with that!
That is absurd. Most of the stake in democracy does not come from the act of voting as an individual. My vote has never ever mattered at a GE because I havent lived in a marginal. My benefit in democracy comes from the fact that our leaders know they can be kicked out within a few years, and therefore to some extent have to reflect the priorities and mood of the country.
Things are the sum of their parts.
I take it you would be happy to be disenfranchised?
It would have made zero difference to my life if my personal vote had never counted, so it would not be a big deal, no.
Millions never ever vote but still benefit from democracy. I vote out of civic duty, not with any expectations of my vote actually counting or having any value under FPTP.
The nations are now significantly divided by party.
England is Tory thanks to Johnson turning the old Conservative and Unionist Party into a Blue Labour English Populist Party. I can't see how Johnson lasts much longer (there are always plots to topple the king, Johnson hands the plotters the axe and sticks his head down on the block) but the Tories will.
Wales is Labour thanks to their adaptability over Brexit and the strengthening Welsh identity politics. Wales is no longer that bit attached to England where they talk funny - they are a nation in their own right and increasingly doing things their own way.
Scotland is SNP and we've talked too much already about the forthcoming independence referendum furore.
And NI? Fun times ahead after Arlene "Shit the Bed" Forster has led Norniron out of the UK customs union and into semi-detachment and irrelevance as far as London is concerned. None of the mainstream UK parties trade in NI, but the old two-way fight between Unionists and Nationalists appears to have been joined by a non-aligned centre.
The forthcoming "Team UK" summit will be crucial. We know that Boris is all dominant in England, but in the other home nations he is nowhere. He can choose his moment in history and try to forge a new consensus that sustains partnership and co-operation.
Or he can bang the table as he does the dispatch box, say I have a majority of 82, Westminster rules, shut the fuck up. It doesn't matter that the UK parliament is sovereign over the national parliaments if the people of those nations and those parliaments believe that Westminster is directly acting against their will and their interests in a cavalier you will do what we say manner.
Johnson could be a giant of history. Or a sidenote when a furious Mrs Gove / Cummings alliance sinks him. His problem is that despite being tactically clever and lucky, he has never shown any ideas or aptitude to strategy.
Another way of looking at it is that the nationalists went backwards in both Wales and Scotland.
Rumours of the death of the UK have been greatly exaggerated.
How have the nationalists gone backwards in Scotland? Record turnout. Highest ever vote for the SNP. Highest ever majority of Yes MSPs.
Yesterdays polling with remain on 58% v leave 42% and only one in eight Scots think it is a priority issue confirmed the recent trend away from independence
Furthermore, I really do think Sturgeon only values her own legacy, and she will not gamble it without a clear majority of Scots demanding it, and that is not the same as a SNP/Green alliance promoting it
Everything's going so well for Johnson at the moment, I can't help feeling something's going to come out of the woodwork to derail his premiership at some point over the next 12 to 18 months. It happened to Tony Blair when he looked utterly invincible, first with the fuel protests in the year 2000, and the with Iraq in 2003. You could also include being slow-handclapped by the Women's Institute around the same time. I remember what a shock that was, because it was the first time anything had remotely gone wrong for him since he became leader of the Labour Party in 1994, even though it was rather trivial in hindsight.
I'm not sure the arrival of a pandemic classifies as going well. Provides opportunities for success or failure and massive spending.
Covid has been sensationally good for the PM. OK so 150k people are dead but as Philip lovingly points out people die anyway. What Covid has done for the PM is lengthy - foster that blitz spirit, gain people's sympathy (he almost died / he's doing his best), spaff fucktons of money at people his party would not have given much of anything to otherwise, reward friends and party donors, and come out the back end with a vaccination boost.
What would the last 15 months have been like for him without Covid? All the focus would have been on Brexit, on a negotiation that failed to achieve any of its key objectives, of a chaotic exit of the EEA and CU, of cuts biting in places like Hartlepool.
There seem to be posts eulogising Liar like he is some kind of political genius - he isn't. Yes he is smart tactically but has never displayed any nous for strategy. He's just very very very lucky that disasters like Covid drop into his lap like a love bomb from General Galtieri did to transform Thatcher's premiership.
You really do come across as just plainly bitter
About what? I am (a) not pushing for Labour and (b) not that bothered about the Tories dominating England having left the country.
Engage on the point. The Tories would have had a tough year had it not been for Covid. The effective bribe money on offer to Hartlepool voters wouldn't have been there without Covid.
Untrue. Towns deal, future night street fund, levelling up funds. These are all pre covid town investment programmes.
Give over. Thats a sticking plaster at best. The towns deal at best pays for one project in one of the winning towns. And "levelling up funds" are what exactly? These areas needed hosing with cash - happened because of Covid and wouldn't have happened otherwise.
How can I say this with confidence? Because Mansfield. One of the early blue wins in the wall. Has had an enormous £12m. Wow! That will make all the difference...
Yes £12m is a lot of money. If you think it isn't then it goes to show that nothing will ever be good enough.
"Hosing with cash" isn't a solution either, what's needed is to create the conditions that allow for further growth, which creates a virtuous positive feedback loop.
When it comes to town centre improvements £12m really doesn't go very far.
For instance Middlesbrough Station is getting £35m and that really is a small station. Darlington Bank Top is getting £105m - so it's refurbished prior to the 2025 celebrations.
Boro station is a classic piece of Houchenism. Virgin/LNER have services to Boro as part of their legal franchise obligations. Network Rail need to deliver some infrastructure upgrades to allow 5 car 130m trains to stable, it took a while, Houchen then claims personal credit for bringing London trains to Middlesbrough.
I challenged him directly on Twitter about it - he insisted that it took him to co-ordinate for it to happen. Despite him having zero impact on the legal obligation to deliver the services, on Network Rail or on Middlesbrough Council.
Our mainline to London station (Alfreton) still does not have wheelchair access to both platforms. It was taken away before 1995.
Campaigning has been continuous by MPs, but it keeps getting cancelled or delayed after being agreed.
Don't underestimate the importance of a champion inside the loop.
On £12m, agree however you can do a lot with it in say a medium sized down.
I take your point about local champions. But the difference between your wheelchair ramp at Alfreton (or Billingham) and the introduction of London trains to Boro is that the former is not a legal franchise obligation.
Houchen had no need to intervene to get the trains running. That had been decided before he was elected.
What's the issue that the voters are going to vote against the government upon?
If there's a shortage of drivers then hire drivers, and pay them a decent wage.
Maybe some Deliveroo style drivers might want to train to be HGV drivers if offered a decent wage for doing the job.
It will make sod all difference politically. Lets look at the "pay a decent wage" argument - which I support btw.
Hauliers cannot pass on the additional costs of higher wages as supermarkets won't accept them and consumers won't pay them British workers don't want to be truck drivers in sufficient numbers - hours and being away from home as much of an issue as wages Foreign drivers therefore step in. Until Brexit removes their right to work here.
So we go back to slogans. "Pay them more" doesn't work. "British jobs for British workers" doesn't work. So we muddle along until the supply chain falls over, people finally notice and the blame of Patel not putting drivers on the shortage occupation list rightly falls on the EU.
Except the supply chain won't fall over, because if the choice is "pay what needs to be paid" or "have the supply chain fall over", companies will need to pay what needs to be paid.
Supermarkets won't accept higher prices if they have a choice, if they have no choice they will deal with it and move on.
As long it is as easy to get your free voter id as it is to register to vote (and it is incredibly easy, 2.mins on a website), I don't see the problem.
Its not like the UK is proposing anything like the outrageous type stuff that goes on in the US.
Yes. It is done. Brexit is leaving the European Union. That is over a year into the past. You are talking about all the things we have done after Brexit.
On topic, it's still too early for me to bet on the outcome of the next GE - which is 3 (very long) years away.
It's not too early for me to bet against who will be next PM, and that's where I'm focussing my main effort. I will switch tact about Autumn/Winter 2022.
You think there'll be a change in PM within those three long years?
If there is then it won't be Starmer, as the Tories have a huge majority, so it's safe to lay him, and I doubt the replacement for Boris will be Rishi.
If it's after GE2024 Starmer may no longer be leader, so it will never be him, and the scope for another Tory to take the mantle - after Boris - gets greater the longer Boris stays in office.
I'd like to point out that the same groups were against individual voter registration. Ireland manages to have ID cards for voting without much fuss, I don't see why it's controversial as long as the ID card is free for people who don't have a driving license or passport and has no validity beyond voting.
Systems that rely on honesty are usually riddled with fraud. See the furlough and other job related schemes from last year and this year as an example.
Honestly if Starmer is leader at the next election I think the Tories will increase their majority, not go go all Sion Simon.
He's completey misdiagnosed the issue with their core voters and I don't think he can ever win their trust on brexit or cultural values and Red Wall voters are "values voters", they will vote primarily for leaders who align with their culture and who they think they can sit and have a drink with in the pub. Starmer can talk economy until he is out of air to breathe and he won't win them over. He was remianer and mischief maker in chief, everyone remembers that.
I disagree: I think the Conservatives have only modest opportunities to take further seats from Labour in the old "Red Wall", but are under threat 20-30 seats if tactical voting returns. My central prediction is that the Conservatives end up with a 35-50 seat majority next time around, off a broadly similar vote share as 2019.
I can see the Conservatives sweeping the north if they carry on like this, which I think they will
Human nature is to attribute one's successes to oneself, while blaming others for whatever problems might befall you.
Which is why governments tend to lose popularity over time. Objectively, the period from 1992 to 1997 was one of great prosperity, with rapid growth, falling unemployment, and the like. Yet the government had managed to store up enough grievances, and their opponents were willing to tactically vote.
My gut is that the Conservative vote share will hold up well in 2024 (and which, by the way, would be the highest vote share of either Lab or Con since... well... a long time ago...). But it only takes a modest amount of tactical voting for that to result in them seeing a smaller majority.
Except that, in 2020, the government had three events which caused their rating to fall as a visible step change, with stasis in between. One was in May, caused by the Durham fiasco. One was in August, caused by the exam fiasco. One was in December, caused by the lockdown fiasco.
The Great Vaccination reset things, and has given the government another life.
But to bet on the next GE is to bet on the ratio of fiascos to triumphs for this government...
Yes, three years is a long time, so a Labour revival is very possible. Hard to see Starmer going though he should.
The mechanisms to challenge a Labour Leader are a much higher bar than a Tory one.
Stepping back, why exactly do you think Starmer should go? I ask because there is a hell of a lot of spin out there, if not some campaigns against him. Is the by election loss enough (normally it wouldn’t) or was the 1% swing not enough.
Meanwhile, as Labour politicians are kicking lumps out of each other, Priti Patel is engaged in some GOP style voter suppression tactics and other electoral changes that should substantially benefit Conservative candidates.
Yeah it's disgusting. What will count as acceptable ID? OK, driving licence and passport, obvs. But what about work IDs, university IDs, any other non-governmental IDs with a photo on?
If the government expect us to show photo ID to vote, then they should avail us of a universal form of photo ID, issued free of charge. A national ID card, if you will.
Of course, those on the right will scream that it is an intolerable outrage to expect a freeborn Englishman to carry an ID card; that will make us akin to a police state.
Accept when it comes to voting, apparently, when it's being justified to tackle a problem - voter fraud - that doesn't exist in any meaningful way in this country.
It's the shamelessness that really galls.
It's quite transparent why they are doing so. A day after the Conservatives lose but two mayoralties they decide, let's change the system to our advantage.
I have a feeling that once the Covid dust settles, these sort of Dick Dastardly scams will blow up in their faces.
The only reason we have the Supplementary Vote system for Mayoral elections, rather than AV, is that SV is better for Labour than AV. It was a scam in the first place.
I prefer a Labour scam to a Tory one, but the status quo is short of a democratic ideal.
Given that 1/6 of votes in London were cast incorrectly SV seems too complex for the benefits it offers.
The problem with the London Mayor election was not the voting system but the confusing design of the ballot paper, as explored on previous threads.
A friend of mine, who is a qualified accountant aged 61 told me he voted Bailey first choice and Fox second, he said that he knew Fox couldn't win but he wanted him to get as many votes as possible and he wanted Bailey to beat Khan.
He was surprised when I told him that he should have voted them the other way round and I explained the voting system to him. If professionally qualified people don't understand the system what chance has the Hoi polloi?
There were too many candidates, the £10,000 deposit didn't put them off so in future I suggest that they up the number accenting signatures from each borough from 2 to say 20. This won't be any problem for the main parties or any small parties and independents with serious levels of support but might put off a few no hopers.
What's the issue that the voters are going to vote against the government upon?
If there's a shortage of drivers then hire drivers, and pay them a decent wage.
Maybe some Deliveroo style drivers might want to train to be HGV drivers if offered a decent wage for doing the job.
It will make sod all difference politically. Lets look at the "pay a decent wage" argument - which I support btw.
Hauliers cannot pass on the additional costs of higher wages as supermarkets won't accept them and consumers won't pay them British workers don't want to be truck drivers in sufficient numbers - hours and being away from home as much of an issue as wages Foreign drivers therefore step in. Until Brexit removes their right to work here.
So we go back to slogans. "Pay them more" doesn't work. "British jobs for British workers" doesn't work. So we muddle along until the supply chain falls over, people finally notice and the blame of Patel not putting drivers on the shortage occupation list rightly falls on the EU.
Except the supply chain won't fall over, because if the choice is "pay what needs to be paid" or "have the supply chain fall over", companies will need to pay what needs to be paid.
Supermarkets won't accept higher prices if they have a choice, if they have no choice they will deal with it and move on.
May I refer you to https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57021128 for what will happen next (half my linkedIn feed this money is their rapid use of MUCs by dubious and desperate driver agencies).
The whole driver labour market is tied up with a set of contracts that simply cannot survive a 30% deduction in available labour and a 30% increase in costs.
Both of those items have occurred since April and next week is going to be an entertaining nightmare for those watching at a distance.
While I tend to agree that there's probably not a big problem.... How do we know there's no significant voter fraud? How would we know? Other than lots of people turning up to discover that htey'd already voted? If you knew a group of people who were very unlikely to vote, then you could rock up at the polling stations and take their votes.
(I also tend to take the view that we should have evidence of a problem before trying to fix it).
A reminder that electoral fraud is a tiny problem. There were only 164 cases of any kind at the 2019 general election. Across all elections in 2019 the police found it necessary to issue a mere 2 cautions. Electoral Commission says UK has “low levels of proven electoral fraud.” https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1391687736915070977/photo/1
Note the "proven". The other explanation is that the lack of ID requirements means it's so piss easy to get away with and such a low priority for the police that nobody is ever caught, much less prosecuted.
Personally I think postal voting is probably the real scandal though, because anyone can see how you vote if you let them. It effectively undoes the secret ballot.
Yes. It is done. Brexit is leaving the European Union. That is over a year into the past. You are talking about all the things we have done after Brexit.
Once could argue that it was done just over four months ago now, since transition kept us de facto in the EU, while de jure being out.
What's the issue that the voters are going to vote against the government upon?
If there's a shortage of drivers then hire drivers, and pay them a decent wage.
Maybe some Deliveroo style drivers might want to train to be HGV drivers if offered a decent wage for doing the job.
It will make sod all difference politically. Lets look at the "pay a decent wage" argument - which I support btw.
Hauliers cannot pass on the additional costs of higher wages as supermarkets won't accept them and consumers won't pay them British workers don't want to be truck drivers in sufficient numbers - hours and being away from home as much of an issue as wages Foreign drivers therefore step in. Until Brexit removes their right to work here.
So we go back to slogans. "Pay them more" doesn't work. "British jobs for British workers" doesn't work. So we muddle along until the supply chain falls over, people finally notice and the blame of Patel not putting drivers on the shortage occupation list rightly falls on the EU.
Except the supply chain won't fall over, because if the choice is "pay what needs to be paid" or "have the supply chain fall over", companies will need to pay what needs to be paid.
Supermarkets won't accept higher prices if they have a choice, if they have no choice they will deal with it and move on.
May I refer you to https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57021128 for what will happen next (half my linkedIn feed this money is their rapid use of MUCs by dubious and desperate driver agencies).
The whole driver labour market is tied up with a set of contracts that simply cannot survive a 30% deduction in available labour and a 30% increase in costs.
Both of those items have occurred since April and next week is going to be an entertaining nightmare for those watching at a distance.
Well then considering the referendum was nearly five years ago the companies that have signed stupid contracts will get replaced with ones that haven't, if need be.
@RochdalePioneers to all intents and purposes the Scottish Parliament result is virtually identical to the elections held in 2016, before Brexit took place.
Given how high the SNP and Yes were riding, and expectations accordingly, then, yes, I'd say they'd gone backwards; it was supposed to be a slam dunk.
The main difference is the SNP were seeking an explicit mandate to have another IndyRef, which they did not in 2016, so it's now a question of tactics on what both sides do next.
HYUFD has an unarguable point. If HMG cedes an indyref now it establishes the principle that a Holyrood parliament, with a pro-referendum majority from various parties, can have a new referendum whenever it likes (as there will always be a ‘reason’ for a new vote)
That cannot stand. It is a recipe for permanent chaos (and a crocked Scottish economy, as investment flees from the instability).
At some point Boris will need to man up and say a flat No for this reason
What's the issue that the voters are going to vote against the government upon?
If there's a shortage of drivers then hire drivers, and pay them a decent wage.
Maybe some Deliveroo style drivers might want to train to be HGV drivers if offered a decent wage for doing the job.
It will make sod all difference politically. Lets look at the "pay a decent wage" argument - which I support btw.
Hauliers cannot pass on the additional costs of higher wages as supermarkets won't accept them and consumers won't pay them British workers don't want to be truck drivers in sufficient numbers - hours and being away from home as much of an issue as wages Foreign drivers therefore step in. Until Brexit removes their right to work here.
So we go back to slogans. "Pay them more" doesn't work. "British jobs for British workers" doesn't work. So we muddle along until the supply chain falls over, people finally notice and the blame of Patel not putting drivers on the shortage occupation list rightly falls on the EU.
Except the supply chain won't fall over, because if the choice is "pay what needs to be paid" or "have the supply chain fall over", companies will need to pay what needs to be paid.
Supermarkets won't accept higher prices if they have a choice, if they have no choice they will deal with it and move on.
The industry has a shortage of drivers which is becoming acute. Unless we allow foreign drivers to step back in to fill the hole, then a lack of drivers will have supply chains fall over. It isn't about pay, its about a shortage of drivers.
As for your comments about supermarkets, you've never traded with them...
HYUFD has an unarguable point. If HMG cedes an indyref now it establishes the principle that a Holyrood parliament, with a pro-referendum majority from various parties, can have a new referendum whenever it likes (as there will always be a ‘reason’ for a new vote)
That cannot stand. It is a recipe for permanent chaos (and a crocked Scottish economy, as investment flees from the instability).
At some point Boris will need to man up and say a flat No for this reason
Why can't it stand, its called democracy.
If the Scots don't want a future referendum they can choose to not vote for the SNP in a future election, if they have another referendum in their manifesto.
Comments
So yes, that was the point. Every HGV driver I know voted for Brexit.
Remember too in 2015 the Tories got 40.9% of the vote in England and UKIP got 14.1% in England making 55% combined for an EU referendum, well over 50%, something the SNP and Greens failed to match for indyref2 last week
https://archive.ph/eg2lt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_United_Kingdom_general_election_in_England
As for voter id being used for creeping police statism, it’s happening everywhere. Nothing we can do about it.
It would have a been a crushing No victory.
Con: 53.8% (+12.7)
Lab: 34.1% (-16.3)
Grn: 8.5% (-0.1)
Ind: 3.7% (+3.7)
Con GAIN from Lab
Another annilihation on the outer edges of Nuneaton.
What is interesting, here, is the echo of the Black Death. One of the most famous and unexpected consequences of the Black Death was the emancipation of millions of serfs, who - thanks to acute labour shortages due to the millions of dead - were finally able to up sticks, quit the village, and go find better wages. Which they did
Plagues have strangely positive effects, amid the generalized horror
It'll be reversed long before that...
https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/05/mighty-morphin-flat-packed-pasta-takes-on-3d-shapes-as-it-cooks/
(It being very likely that vaccine and booster shot(s) will have a similar effect.)
Vaccination boosts naturally enhanced neutralizing breadth to SARS-CoV-2 one year after infection
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.05.07.443175v1
Over one year after its inception, the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) pandemic caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) remains difficult to control despite the availability of several excellent vaccines. Progress in controlling the pandemic is slowed by the emergence of variants that appear to be more transmissible and more resistant to antibodies. Here we report on a cohort of 63 COVID-19-convalescent individuals assessed at 1.3, 6.2 and 12 months after infection, 41% of whom also received mRNA vaccines. In the absence of vaccination antibody reactivity to the receptor binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV-2, neutralizing activity and the number of RBD-specific memory B cells remain relatively stable from 6 to 12 months. Vaccination increases all components of the humoral response, and as expected, results in serum neutralizing activities against variants of concern that are comparable to or greater than neutralizing activity against the original Wuhan Hu-1 achieved by vaccination of naive individuals. The mechanism underlying these broad-based responses involves ongoing antibody somatic mutation, memory B cell clonal turnover, and development of monoclonal antibodies that are exceptionally resistant to SARS-CoV-2 RBD mutations, including those found in variants of concern. In addition, B cell clones expressing broad and potent antibodies are selectively retained in the repertoire over time and expand dramatically after vaccination. The data suggest that immunity in convalescent individuals will be very long lasting and that convalescent individuals who receive available mRNA vaccines will produce antibodies and memory B cells that should be protective against circulating SARS-CoV-2 variants. Should memory responses evolve in a similar manner in vaccinated individuals, additional appropriately timed boosting with available vaccines could cover most circulating variants of concern.
The BTL millionaires people are the ones who bought the houses for 30% of what they are worth now.
Numbering candidates 1,2,3 is perfectly straightforward, and something people easily understand. If the government would only drop its irrational resistance to preferential voting, there'd be much less resistance to change - if your job is simply to find the candidate you like best and put a "1" beside their name, the layout and columns of the ballot paper are much less likely to lead people astray.
https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1391687777285181441
The 2 docs you mention, plus perhaps certain that require a strong checking process to obtain and are secure documents.
I challenged him directly on Twitter about it - he insisted that it took him to co-ordinate for it to happen. Despite him having zero impact on the legal obligation to deliver the services, on Network Rail or on Middlesbrough Council.
All personal choice, of course. But we're next down the weekend after 17 May when going into their house becomes legal again, because I don't think they'd have let us otherwise. We could have gone down and met them outside, but they're at an age where that is very weather/temperature dependent.
For a lot of people, 17 May is a big thing, even though the date itself is clearly somewhat arbitrary.
Nationalists would also demand indyref3 the day after having cut the No lead from 2014 even if No narrowly won, the UK government having been so weak as to allow indyref2 before a generation had elapsed since indyref1.
Quebec's 51% No vote in its second independence referendum in 1995 only settled the issue, despite the narrow margin, as it was held 15 years after the first referendum in 1980 ie a genuine generation and had devomax for the Quebec Parliament added on too
They could be like a cold weather Lestotho.
Should come in handy for him after Batley & Spen
https://tinyurl.com/433fpxj9
Labour MP Wes Streeting asked Lord Rose, the head of the pro-EU campaign group Britain Stronger in Europe, whether leaving the EU would result in a rise in wages for low-skilled workers in the UK.
The former M&S boss agreed that any restriction in available labour could lead to such an increase, before adding - at a Treasury select committee session - "that's not necessarily a good thing".
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-politics-eu-referendum-35707955
Not good for who, Lord Rose?
"Dear @metpoliceuk Please stop harassing my house and my children yet AGAIN. It makes them cry. It’s bang out of order. You’re Thugs."
"If you come to my house again for no reason. There will be trouble."
For better or worse, Brexit isn't being reversed. Just thinking rationally, Tories likely to win 2024 / Labour certainly not running on reversing Brexit and I think highly likely nobody risks going near it again in 2029. So thats 2034 before the Lib whos sweep into power or something...
There was a small window where it might have been stopped (I think that would have led to even more trouble), but that has passed.
Times: "An ally claimed she was effectively the boss of Dodds, as party chairwoman, and Shabana Mahmood, the new campaign co-ordinator. This was flatly denied by Starmer’s supporters, and Rayner’s camp eventually backed down". This underlines who's been playing games.
I actually feel a bit sorry for Starmer
Hauliers cannot pass on the additional costs of higher wages as supermarkets won't accept them and consumers won't pay them
British workers don't want to be truck drivers in sufficient numbers - hours and being away from home as much of an issue as wages
Foreign drivers therefore step in. Until Brexit removes their right to work here.
So we go back to slogans. "Pay them more" doesn't work. "British jobs for British workers" doesn't work. So we muddle along until the supply chain falls over, people finally notice and the blame of Patel not putting drivers on the shortage occupation list rightly falls on the EU.
Manchester, West of England, Wales and the south were all better for Labour - not that it makes up for their wholesale shipping of support in the north and Midlands.
Day 1 at Holyrood Scottish Parliament @ScotParl
Feeling excited, nervous and proud to be the first Indian Sikh @ScotTories MSP
https://twitter.com/PamGosalMSP/status/1391687889034039297?s=20
The primary job of Government is going to be repairing the damage.
They are already desperately trying to reopen the Irish deal. What other aspects of Brexit will they try and
reversefix ?Doesn't resolve the shortage of drivers and the impact it creates though...
However...
There is no significant voter fraud in this country. I don't understand how this legislation can be interpreted or defended as anything other than a piece of attempted voter suppression? There's no problem to fix. The "fix" causes problems. The "conservative" approach (for the Conservatives of the old days) would be to *not interfere with the status quo*.
- turns out there are clauses in post-Brexit free trade agreements (FTAs) with 23 countries which effectively negate those benefits
https://www.ft.com/content/625d1913-9242-4d97-9d0b-9cd6925c4e0e
BoZo wants to rip up the "awesome" deal he signed
(I also tend to take the view that we should have evidence of a problem before trying to fix it).
Campaigning has been continuous by MPs, but it keeps getting cancelled or delayed after being agreed.
Don't underestimate the importance of a champion inside the loop.
On £12m, agree however you can do a lot with it in say a medium sized down.
Millions never ever vote but still benefit from democracy. I vote out of civic duty, not with any expectations of my vote actually counting or having any value under FPTP.
But then we know that.
The 45% Yes vote in 2014 was based on both rUK and Scotland continuing in the EU (ie no trade barriers) and $100 oil. Both no longer apply. When confronted with questions on currency, borders, etc., Nicola really struggles, even after years of practice in developing answers. Very telling.
Fundamentally I think a number of Scots use voting SNP as a way of leveraging wonga out of Westminster, although most Yes voters apparently think Scotland is actually a net financial contributor to UK. Any future No campaign should focus on disabusing them of that misapprehension, preferably headed by some non-politicians.
Where cases have arisen, I assume it's from someone turning up at the polling station and beng told they've voted already?
The stuff you are talking about are the things we have done after leaving the EU. Reversing some of the details of our post-EU trade deals is not reversing our departure from the EU.
Its not like the UK is proposing anything like the outrageous type stuff that goes on in the US.
A mistake rather than dishonesty I'm sure.
https://twitter.com/NicolaSturgeon/status/1391141898052636675?s=20g
Edit: I see you've already attracted the credulous.
A galvanising leader can get more young labour votes out; the Tories don't have the same problem
But to be fair to the Scottish and Welsh First Ministers, Nicola Sturgeon and Mark Drakeford, they never challenged the way the vaccines were distributed. Whereas the Labour Party in England did. And we should not forget it — because it reveals something about why they have become so unpopular.
In January, the English Labour Party objected to the jabs schedule set out by the Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation (JCVI), which was to prioritise purely on the basis of risk of dying from Covid.
We were all ranked by age, eldest first — with only front-line health workers given higher priority, regardless of age. It was simple, fair and based on the best medical assessment of risk of death from Covid.
But Keir Starmer's Labour Party disagreed, and argued that all 'key workers' should be prioritised. Or, as its press release declared: 'Approximately 6.2 million key workers would benefit from being moved up the priority list.'
Doubtless they would. But the inevitable consequence, had Labour's policy been adopted, would have been to delay the vaccination of older, more vulnerable people, with, literally, fatal results. Needless, to say, all the 'key workers' Labour sought to prioritise were in the public sector, whose trade unions are the party's most significant financial backers. Follow the money.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-9560441/DOMINIC-LAWSON-Labour-unions-jumped-vaccine-queue-voters-preferred-fairness.html
Houchen had no need to intervene to get the trains running. That had been decided before he was elected.
Supermarkets won't accept higher prices if they have a choice, if they have no choice they will deal with it and move on.
If it's after GE2024 Starmer may no longer be leader, so it will never be him, and the scope for another Tory to take the mantle - after Boris - gets greater the longer Boris stays in office.
Systems that rely on honesty are usually riddled with fraud. See the furlough and other job related schemes from last year and this year as an example.
He was surprised when I told him that he should have voted them the other way round and I explained the voting system to him. If professionally qualified people don't understand the system what chance has the Hoi polloi?
There were too many candidates, the £10,000 deposit didn't put them off so in future I suggest that they up the number accenting signatures from each borough from 2 to say 20. This won't be any problem for the main parties or any small parties and independents with serious levels of support but might put off a few no hopers.
Apparently there was a byelection in Brighouse and Spenborough in 1960... that must overlap with Batley and Spen, surely.
It was unusual, in that the governing Conservatives gained the seat off Labour.
And then in 1964, Labour won the next General Election. Admittedly, Hugh Gaitskell had died in the intervening time.
Something for everyone there, I hope. Apart from Hugh Gaitskell perhaps.
The whole driver labour market is tied up with a set of contracts that simply cannot survive a 30% deduction in available labour and a 30% increase in costs.
Both of those items have occurred since April and next week is going to be an entertaining nightmare for those watching at a distance.
Personally I think postal voting is probably the real scandal though, because anyone can see how you vote if you let them. It effectively undoes the secret ballot.
Either way though, its done now.
Given how high the SNP and Yes were riding, and expectations accordingly, then, yes, I'd say they'd gone backwards; it was supposed to be a slam dunk.
The main difference is the SNP were seeking an explicit mandate to have another IndyRef, which they did not in 2016, so it's now a question of tactics on what both sides do next.
That cannot stand. It is a recipe for permanent chaos (and a crocked Scottish economy, as investment flees from the instability).
At some point Boris will need to man up and say a flat No for this reason
As for your comments about supermarkets, you've never traded with them...
If the Scots don't want a future referendum they can choose to not vote for the SNP in a future election, if they have another referendum in their manifesto.