I can't tell whether you are playing a tiny violin about Craig Murray losing, or Scotland's high judicial system going to hell in a handcart.
Malc is right imo on this - Murray did no more than nearly a whole football team of journalists, and I think the only ones that have been gone for are Murray and one other who are both broadly sympathetic to Salmond.
The U.K. Supreme Court is going to kick that straight out, surely?
He didn’t name names, and you couldn’t work out names from his posts.
You could, if you already knew the names, work backwards, but that’s the wrong way around.
Gotta love the irony of UK justice coming to the rescue of a Scottish Nationalist though....
That's where he's just been refused leave to Appeal...
By three High Court judges in Edinburgh. He will appeal above their heads....
No he won’t, he can’t, There is no chance of the U.K. Supreme Court touching this. From the UKSC’s own website “Scotland has a distinctive tradition of criminal law and procedure. The High Court of Justiciary, sitting as an Appeal Court, is the final court of appeal in Scottish criminal cases and its decisions are not subject to review by any court whatsoever”. The UKSC inherited the jurisdiction of the HoL which, for historical reasons, did not and could not hear criminal appeals from Scotland.
What about the European Court of Human Rights?
Which specific article of the ECHR are you suggesting he's breached? And what good would it do him given it takes years to get there?
Nowadays it seems that everything is being "fixed" in order to benefit Johnson and his Gang.
You know the current boundaries are more than 20 years old?
We had two sets of boundary commission reports to fix that.... and they were never implemented.
At one moment it was essential to reduce the number of seats to 600..... and next moment - when the Conservatives won more of these disproportionately small seats - it was suddenly discovered that such a reduction was not necessary after all....
Small wonder people are cynical about the way the country is being run... and for whose benefit.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Those towns that didn't vote conservative presumably voted against the levelling up manifesto. Surely just respecting their vote?
"We have not received any complaints about the statue, and in fact it helps raise around £2,000 a year for charity thanks to the coins deposited within it by visitors"
Absolute classic, we are offended on behalf of people who could be offended, bollocks.
We should be thankful that we have a politically independent Boundary Commission in the UK. Much better than letting the politicians themselves draw the lines, as we see elsewhere.
Yes indeed, but I still fail to see how it is justifiable. I am sure they do their best to be impartial, but I still fail to see how one can define these boundaries on a rational basis. The only rational one to me would be the Isle of Wight!
All of the boundaries in the proposal are irrational? I think you are over-egging it somewhat.
I was referring to the system of constituencies as irrational in itself as they do not reflect anything historical or geographically relevant. I certainly agree that they should not give advantage to one party over another as they did for Labour previously, I am just questioning its rationality as a system. I am not sure what the solution is though! I would like to see a whole redrawing of our constitution, it is a dog's dinner!
What has history got to do with the electoral district for the current parliament? As for geographically relevant, how do you define that? They encompass contiguous regions, and aren't gerrymandered to buggery like some US seats.
I am not sure what the solution is, and I have not studied the criteria that the boundary commission use, but the reality is that we almost certainly have far too many MPs (IMO) and the system of constituencies is an attempt to adapt a very old system that was not built on rationality and certainly not democracy. As a person who is instinctively right of centre I am probably unusual in that I think a system of PR would be far better. If people also want some regional representation then there could be a much better way than we currently have.
Imagine the squealing though if we went down to 600 MPs "I simply REFUSE to have that shithole/those stuck-up ***** in MY constituency..."
Well indeed, 50 was too few. I think the system of government would not be harmed by halving them. Let the Scottish Welsh and Northern Irish act as a revising chamber for laws from their parliaments, set up a small agile "English Parliament" of say 100 EMPs and get rid of the HoL. Let the really good Lordships do something else useful as government advisors
Stunning indeed. Fauci really says this. Go to 1:38
‘Fauci's words are stunning: "You don't wanna go to Hoboken New Jersey or to Fairfax Virginia to be studying the bat-human interface. THAT MIGHT LEAD TO AN OUTBREAK. So you go to China.”’
Nowadays it seems that everything is being "fixed" in order to benefit Johnson and his Gang.
You know the current boundaries are more than 20 years old?
We had two sets of boundary commission reports to fix that.... and they were never implemented.
At one moment it was essential to reduce the number of seats to 600..... and next moment - when the Conservatives won more of these disproportionately small seats - it was suddenly discovered that such a reduction was not necessary after all....
Small wonder people are cynical about the way the country is being run... and for whose benefit.
Something happened in between: Brexit. Now MPs have a ton more work to do that was previously done in Brussels.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Including some not very "left behind towns" and excluding some "left behind towns" that are purely coincidentally Labour held...
Nowadays it seems that everything is being "fixed" in order to benefit Johnson and his Gang.
You know the current boundaries are more than 20 years old?
We had two sets of boundary commission reports to fix that.... and they were never implemented.
At one moment it was essential to reduce the number of seats to 600..... and next moment - when the Conservatives won more of these disproportionately small seats - it was suddenly discovered that such a reduction was not necessary after all....
Small wonder people are cynical about the way the country is being run... and for whose benefit.
Cynicism is fine, but I think it's pretty obvious the retention of 650 was less about the Tories having won more of the smaller seats and more about getting the votes to pass the bill for the review - since a major reason the last one was not implemented was there were not sufficient votes as too many would lose out. Keeping it at 650 may well have been key to getting MPs to agree that the results of this review would be implemented without a parliamentary vote on it.
I can't tell whether you are playing a tiny violin about Craig Murray losing, or Scotland's high judicial system going to hell in a handcart.
Malc is right imo on this - Murray did no more than nearly a whole football team of journalists, and I think the only ones that have been gone for are Murray and one other who are both broadly sympathetic to Salmond.
The U.K. Supreme Court is going to kick that straight out, surely?
He didn’t name names, and you couldn’t work out names from his posts.
You could, if you already knew the names, work backwards, but that’s the wrong way around.
The UKSC has no jurisdiction in Scottish criminal matters. There's no appeal from the Scottish High Court.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Including some not very "left behind towns" and excluding some "left behind towns" that are purely coincidentally Labour held...
They’ll know which way to vote next time then, won’t they?
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Including some not very "left behind towns" and excluding some "left behind towns" that are purely coincidentally Labour held...
They’ll know which way to vote next time then, won’t they?
Magdalen College also represents outdated gender relations, theocracy and unwonted elitism.
I think they should just dissolve themselves and be done with it.
..and they pretentiously pronounce it differently to how it is spelt for goodness sake. And, according to Dan Brown (and probably Sean T also) Ms. Magdelene was the bearer of Christ's children! (Sorry the latter bit was just a gratuitous attempt to mock SeanT's "literature")
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Including some not very "left behind towns" and excluding some "left behind towns" that are purely coincidentally Labour held...
I'd like to see some actual numbers on this. How many towns constituencies are there, how many voted Tory, and how many are getting money from the Towns Fund. In the latest list there was a mix, and while there is a skew towards Tory seats, I think that is because the Tories now hold a lot of this type of constituencies, with Labour relegated to the cities.
"We have not received any complaints about the statue, and in fact it helps raise around £2,000 a year for charity thanks to the coins deposited within it by visitors"
Absolute classic, we are offended on behalf of people who could be offended, bollocks.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
"We have not received any complaints about the statue, and in fact it helps raise around £2,000 a year for charity thanks to the coins deposited within it by visitors"
Absolute classic, we are offended on behalf of people who could be offended, bollocks.
Isn't a plaque telling the legend helpful?
Does hartlepool get that many monkey visitors that are going to be offended at being thought french?
I can't tell whether you are playing a tiny violin about Craig Murray losing, or Scotland's high judicial system going to hell in a handcart.
Malc is right imo on this - Murray did no more than nearly a whole football team of journalists, and I think the only ones that have been gone for are Murray and one other who are both broadly sympathetic to Salmond.
The U.K. Supreme Court is going to kick that straight out, surely?
He didn’t name names, and you couldn’t work out names from his posts.
You could, if you already knew the names, work backwards, but that’s the wrong way around.
The UKSC has no jurisdiction in Scottish criminal matters. There's no appeal from the Scottish High Court.
So why did the Scottish judges refuse him leave to appeal to the U.K. Supreme Court? Presumably they could have allowed the appeal?
He says he intends to appeal to UKSC directly, will be interesting to see what happens next...
It shows that the FBI’s use of ANoM was revealed on Tuesday because a court warrant obtained in another country to assist in the operation expired the previous day.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
I can't tell whether you are playing a tiny violin about Craig Murray losing, or Scotland's high judicial system going to hell in a handcart.
Malc is right imo on this - Murray did no more than nearly a whole football team of journalists, and I think the only ones that have been gone for are Murray and one other who are both broadly sympathetic to Salmond.
The U.K. Supreme Court is going to kick that straight out, surely?
He didn’t name names, and you couldn’t work out names from his posts.
You could, if you already knew the names, work backwards, but that’s the wrong way around.
The UKSC has no jurisdiction in Scottish criminal matters. There's no appeal from the Scottish High Court.
So why did they need to reject an application if one is not possible?
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Does the FT not understand the distinction between "town" and "city"?
Was the town schemes not predicated on the towns putting forward proposals and proposals selected on what would give the most bang for buck? I would certainly hope so
Nowadays it seems that everything is being "fixed" in order to benefit Johnson and his Gang.
You know the current boundaries are more than 20 years old?
We had two sets of boundary commission reports to fix that.... and they were never implemented.
At one moment it was essential to reduce the number of seats to 600..... and next moment - when the Conservatives won more of these disproportionately small seats - it was suddenly discovered that such a reduction was not necessary after all....
Small wonder people are cynical about the way the country is being run... and for whose benefit.
Cynicism is fine, but I think it's pretty obvious the retention of 650 was less about the Tories having won more of the smaller seats and more about getting the votes to pass the bill for the review - since a major reason the last one was not implemented was there were not sufficient votes as too many would lose out. Keeping it at 650 may well have been key to getting MPs to agree that the results of this review would be implemented without a parliamentary vote on it.
That was indeed the reason. Fundamentally why we will never see any real constitutional reform that does not benefit the party who is in power. It is a major democratic weakness of the system
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
The top right (most deprived) places that are Labour held but placed in priority groups 2&3 are: Tower Hamlets, Islington, Salford, Wirral, and Hackney. Or in other words - all in cities.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
"We have not received any complaints about the statue, and in fact it helps raise around £2,000 a year for charity thanks to the coins deposited within it by visitors"
Absolute classic, we are offended on behalf of people who could be offended, bollocks.
Isn't a plaque telling the legend helpful?
The council don't own the statue, nor is it on their land....the current owners clearly haven't felt the need to explain the legend...the council are imposing this on the basis that somebody somewhere might be offended, despite nobody ever complaining.
I can't tell whether you are playing a tiny violin about Craig Murray losing, or Scotland's high judicial system going to hell in a handcart.
Malc is right imo on this - Murray did no more than nearly a whole football team of journalists, and I think the only ones that have been gone for are Murray and one other who are both broadly sympathetic to Salmond.
The U.K. Supreme Court is going to kick that straight out, surely?
He didn’t name names, and you couldn’t work out names from his posts.
You could, if you already knew the names, work backwards, but that’s the wrong way around.
Gotta love the irony of UK justice coming to the rescue of a Scottish Nationalist though....
That's where he's just been refused leave to Appeal...
By three High Court judges in Edinburgh. He will appeal above their heads....
No he won’t, he can’t, There is no chance of the U.K. Supreme Court touching this. From the UKSC’s own website “Scotland has a distinctive tradition of criminal law and procedure. The High Court of Justiciary, sitting as an Appeal Court, is the final court of appeal in Scottish criminal cases and its decisions are not subject to review by any court whatsoever”. The UKSC inherited the jurisdiction of the HoL which, for historical reasons, did not and could not hear criminal appeals from Scotland.
What about the European Court of Human Rights?
Which specific article of the ECHR are you suggesting he's breached? And what good would it do him given it takes years to get there?
Article 10 seems relevant here.
If he's reported on the case in the same way as other journalists but been subject to a malicious prosecution by the state, then that would violate Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights surely?
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Nowadays it seems that everything is being "fixed" in order to benefit Johnson and his Gang.
You know the current boundaries are more than 20 years old?
We had two sets of boundary commission reports to fix that.... and they were never implemented.
At one moment it was essential to reduce the number of seats to 600..... and next moment - when the Conservatives won more of these disproportionately small seats - it was suddenly discovered that such a reduction was not necessary after all....
Small wonder people are cynical about the way the country is being run... and for whose benefit.
Cynicism is fine, but I think it's pretty obvious the retention of 650 was less about the Tories having won more of the smaller seats and more about getting the votes to pass the bill for the review - since a major reason the last one was not implemented was there were not sufficient votes as too many would lose out. Keeping it at 650 may well have been key to getting MPs to agree that the results of this review would be implemented without a parliamentary vote on it.
That was indeed the reason. Fundamentally why we will never see any real constitutional reform that does not benefit the party who is in power. It is a major democratic weakness of the system
It is what it is. There's much I'd like to change, but I fear starting from scratch with whole new systems/ideas would not be as beneficial as we think.
And in one respecr the 2020 act has been helpful by making it much harder for a government to sit on the outcome, given they cannot use a political excuse that they don't have the numbers to pass it. A future government could change that, but that it is now the case and the future reviews already scheduled within it, means it requires a positive act by a government to do so, which is not as easy as just not fixing a status quo issue.
Nowadays it seems that everything is being "fixed" in order to benefit Johnson and his Gang.
You know the current boundaries are more than 20 years old?
We had two sets of boundary commission reports to fix that.... and they were never implemented.
At one moment it was essential to reduce the number of seats to 600..... and next moment - when the Conservatives won more of these disproportionately small seats - it was suddenly discovered that such a reduction was not necessary after all....
Small wonder people are cynical about the way the country is being run... and for whose benefit.
Cynicism is fine, but I think it's pretty obvious the retention of 650 was less about the Tories having won more of the smaller seats and more about getting the votes to pass the bill for the review - since a major reason the last one was not implemented was there were not sufficient votes as too many would lose out. Keeping it at 650 may well have been key to getting MPs to agree that the results of this review would be implemented without a parliamentary vote on it.
That was indeed the reason. Fundamentally why we will never see any real constitutional reform that does not benefit the party who is in power. It is a major democratic weakness of the system
I think it's even less interesting than that: it's difficult to get MPs of any stripe to vote in favour of the abolition of one in thirteen of them.
"We have not received any complaints about the statue, and in fact it helps raise around £2,000 a year for charity thanks to the coins deposited within it by visitors"
Absolute classic, we are offended on behalf of people who could be offended, bollocks.
Isn't a plaque telling the legend helpful?
Perhaps it will be. But if the sign was about avoiding offence, yet no one had been offended, then it would be a positive thing for a very stupid, poseur reason.
It shows that the FBI’s use of ANoM was revealed on Tuesday because a court warrant obtained in another country to assist in the operation expired the previous day.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Does the FT not understand the distinction between "town" and "city"?
Given there really isn't much of a distinction between them, that is actually fairly understandable.
I think there's a *huge* distinction between London Boroughs and Mansfield.
Yes, but not between the words 'town' and 'city', in this country at any rate, because there isn't a specific definition of what differentiates a town from a city (not even cathedral presence).
We should be thankful that we have a politically independent Boundary Commission in the UK. Much better than letting the politicians themselves draw the lines, as we see elsewhere.
Yes indeed, but I still fail to see how it is justifiable. I am sure they do their best to be impartial, but I still fail to see how one can define these boundaries on a rational basis. The only rational one to me would be the Isle of Wight!
Er, Isle of Wight gets TWO seats as per recommendation.
They've done an interesting thing to Reading. Two former marginals been carved up into dead certain Labour and certain Con seats. When I was having a go at doing the boundaries myself it was just about the only way that Berkshire semi-worked.
Folks, the Delta variant — a highly infectious COVID-19 strain — is spreading rapidly among young people between 12 and 20 years old in the U.K. If you’re young and haven’t gotten your shot yet, it really is time. It’s the best way to protect yourself and those you love.
Stunning indeed. Fauci really says this. Go to 1:38
‘Fauci's words are stunning: "You don't wanna go to Hoboken New Jersey or to Fairfax Virginia to be studying the bat-human interface. THAT MIGHT LEAD TO AN OUTBREAK. So you go to China.”’
How does Fauci survive these remarks? He’s now admitting he funded gain-of-function research to make bat coronaviruses nastier. And the reason he funded this science in Wuhan is because such research is dangerous, might cause a pandemic, and he didn’t want to take that risk in America
I’m struggling to find an alternative explanation for his words
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Those towns that didn't vote conservative presumably voted against the levelling up manifesto. Surely just respecting their vote?
I actually don’t know the truth of whether Tory seats are unfairly targeted.
But if it is true, I’d expect a bit more concern than “har de har, they don’t like it up em!”.
It’s called corruption. We should be against that, wherever it comes from.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Those towns that didn't vote conservative presumably voted against the levelling up manifesto. Surely just respecting their vote?
I actually don’t know the truth of whether Tory seats are unfairly targeted.
But if it is true, I’d expect a bit more concern than “har de har, they don’t like it up em!”.
It’s called corruption. We should be against that, wherever it comes from.
The If is very important. But the accusation will be there regardless.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Those towns that didn't vote conservative presumably voted against the levelling up manifesto. Surely just respecting their vote?
I actually don’t know the truth of whether Tory seats are unfairly targeted.
But if it is true, I’d expect a bit more concern than “har de har, they don’t like it up em!”.
It’s called corruption. We should be against that, wherever it comes from.
The If is very important. But the accusation will be there regardless.
It’s not as if this particular government doesn’t have...form.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Those towns that didn't vote conservative presumably voted against the levelling up manifesto. Surely just respecting their vote?
I actually don’t know the truth of whether Tory seats are unfairly targeted.
But if it is true, I’d expect a bit more concern than “har de har, they don’t like it up em!”.
It’s called corruption. We should be against that, wherever it comes from.
The If is very important. But the accusation will be there regardless.
It’s not as if this particular government doesn’t have...form.
Concern may be reasonable. But with such serious accusations presumption of guilt is not.
Is is really a surprise when these boundaries were so unfriendly to the Tories and so old?
Back in 2005 a 2% Lab lead resulted in a Lab majority of 66 whilst in 2010 a Tory lead of 7% led to the Tories to being just short of a majority,
Everything changed for the Tories with the post-coalition collapse of the LDs.
My boy Dave played a blinder.
With the exception of the referendum forcing his immediate early resignation...
And ushering in another nine years of Conservative government.
Dave’s only mistake was to back the wrong horse.
Depends on your objective. Tories backing Brexit will I am sure turn out to be tactically brilliant in the short term and strategically stupid in the medium to long term. They have destroyed all the party stood for and are rapidly destroying our international reputation and credibility.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Those towns that didn't vote conservative presumably voted against the levelling up manifesto. Surely just respecting their vote?
I actually don’t know the truth of whether Tory seats are unfairly targeted.
But if it is true, I’d expect a bit more concern than “har de har, they don’t like it up em!”.
It’s called corruption. We should be against that, wherever it comes from.
The If is very important. But the accusation will be there regardless.
It’s not as if this particular government doesn’t have...form.
Concern may be reasonable. But with such serious accusations presumption of guilt is not.
I don’t have a presumption of guilt.
I’d expect posters though to say “this is not true” rather than “har de har!”
I can't tell whether you are playing a tiny violin about Craig Murray losing, or Scotland's high judicial system going to hell in a handcart.
Malc is right imo on this - Murray did no more than nearly a whole football team of journalists, and I think the only ones that have been gone for are Murray and one other who are both broadly sympathetic to Salmond.
Lord Justice Clerk Lady Dorrian explained that Murray deliberately risked jigsaw identification and that revealing complainers’ identities was “abhorrent”.
She said it was “particularly so, given the enormous publicity which the case in question attracted and continues to attract”.
Murray’s offending blog posts and tweets were written over a period of a month and remained up, unredacted, despite the blogger being told they could potentially lead to the identification of women who had made complaints about Mr Salmond, who was eventually acquitted of all 13 charges.
Lady Dorrian said: “It appears from the posts and articles that he was in fact relishing the task he set himself, which was essentially to allow the identities of complainers to be discerned – which he thought was in the public interest – in a way which did not attract sanction.”
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Those towns that didn't vote conservative presumably voted against the levelling up manifesto. Surely just respecting their vote?
I actually don’t know the truth of whether Tory seats are unfairly targeted.
But if it is true, I’d expect a bit more concern than “har de har, they don’t like it up em!”.
It’s called corruption. We should be against that, wherever it comes from.
The If is very important. But the accusation will be there regardless.
It’s not as if this particular government doesn’t have...form.
Concern may be reasonable. But with such serious accusations presumption of guilt is not.
I don’t have a presumption of guilt.
I’d expect posters though to say “this is not true” rather than “har de har!”
I didn't think you had such a presumption. But a lot of people will.
Just as lots of people think every boundary review is a fix - I remember a particularly fun comment to that effect for my local constituency last review, with someone wanting a system to ensure only someone who was backed by a majority won. They hadn't seemed to notice the local Tories get over 50%.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Is there something I'm missing?
The secret funding formula mysteriously favours Tory electorates?
Those towns that didn't vote conservative presumably voted against the levelling up manifesto. Surely just respecting their vote?
I actually don’t know the truth of whether Tory seats are unfairly targeted.
But if it is true, I’d expect a bit more concern than “har de har, they don’t like it up em!”.
It’s called corruption. We should be against that, wherever it comes from.
My comment was somewhat tongue in cheek, as I posted later I would hope its not just money being handed out but instead based on proposals to help level up posited by towns and then money is awarded on a bang for buck basis
It's not "Magdalen College" its the "Middle Common Room" at Magdalen College - the post graduate students, who evidently are as big a wunch of bankers now as 40 years ago (when they were mainly Americans).
It's not "Magdalen College" its the "Middle Common Room" at Magdalen College - the post graduate students, who evidently are as big a wunch of bankers now as 40 years ago (when they were mainly Americans).
Bang goes my solution of making Oxford post-grad only.
Is is really a surprise when these boundaries were so unfriendly to the Tories and so old?
Back in 2005 a 2% Lab lead resulted in a Lab majority of 66 whilst in 2010 a Tory lead of 7% led to the Tories to being just short of a majority,
Everything changed for the Tories with the post-coalition collapse of the LDs.
My boy Dave played a blinder.
With the exception of the referendum forcing his immediate early resignation...
And ushering in another nine years of Conservative government.
Dave’s only mistake was to back the wrong horse.
Depends on your objective. Tories backing Brexit will I am sure turn out to be tactically brilliant in the short term and strategically stupid in the medium to long term. They have destroyed all the party stood for and are rapidly destroying our international reputation and credibility.
But by then, BoJo will be back on the "blethering incoherently to a pissed audience" circuit, so it's Somebody Else's Problem.
(And arguably the problems isn't so much Brexit as the subsequent soil-salting. Demographics imply that a partial rapprochement will be the will of the British people and a practical necessity. But recent antics are going to mean that someone is going to have to eat a mountain of dung to get there...)
Gosh, a net gain for the Tories of 5-10 seats. Whoever would have thought that, eh?
Oh, me.
But is that on the basis of a repeat of the 2019 Tory lead of 11.7%? To what extent would that figure change in the event of the parties being levelpegging?
Folks, the Delta variant — a highly infectious COVID-19 strain — is spreading rapidly among young people between 12 and 20 years old in the U.K. If you’re young and haven’t gotten your shot yet, it really is time. It’s the best way to protect yourself and those you love.
I see Biden has just posted the above..
Biden's publicly announced target was to get 70% vaccinated by 4 July, A target his is likely to miss, at the rate the US is now vaccinating, so he is looking at ways to encourage people to get vaccinated.
The US vaccination rate is now down to under 1 million a day.
That does not mean this is not an issue or could not soon become one. the last estimate I noticed was that 7% of US cases are of the Delta variety.
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
I don't see much in it myself. I suspect that with the increasing C2DE Tory vote and decreasing ABC1 vote, that the geography pretty much cancels out the demography. I cannot see SKS overturning the majority in 2023/4 whatever the constituencies.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
I don't see much in it myself. I suspect that with the increasing C2DE Tory vote and decreasing ABC1 vote, that the geography pretty much cancels out the demography. I cannot see SKS overturning the majority in 2023/4 whatever the constituencies.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
That logic rather eludes me. In 2019 we saw a swing of almost 5% to the Tories in a single election. Why can that not be reversed in 2023 or 2024?
Folks, the Delta variant — a highly infectious COVID-19 strain — is spreading rapidly among young people between 12 and 20 years old in the U.K. If you’re young and haven’t gotten your shot yet, it really is time. It’s the best way to protect yourself and those you love.
I see Biden has just posted the above..
Biden's publicly announced target was to get 70% vaccinated by 4 July, A target his is likely to miss, at the rate the US is now vaccinating, so he is looking at ways to encourage people to get vaccinated.
The US vaccination rate is now down to under 1 million a day.
That does not mean this is not an issue or could not soon become one. the last estimate I noticed was that 7% of US cases are of the Delta variety.
Yes - and the young tend very strongly towards the Democrats at the moment. Which corresponds to being pro COVID vax.
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
I don't see much in it myself. I suspect that with the increasing C2DE Tory vote and decreasing ABC1 vote, that the geography pretty much cancels out the demography. I cannot see SKS overturning the majority in 2023/4 whatever the constituencies.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
Politically it feels like circa 1999 or 2000 now.
Though we have already had a temporary virus slump in the polls leading to roughly parity, which had all the longevity of the fuel protest slump.
Is is really a surprise when these boundaries were so unfriendly to the Tories and so old?
Back in 2005 a 2% Lab lead resulted in a Lab majority of 66 whilst in 2010 a Tory lead of 7% led to the Tories to being just short of a majority,
Everything changed for the Tories with the post-coalition collapse of the LDs.
My boy Dave played a blinder.
With the exception of the referendum forcing his immediate early resignation...
And ushering in another nine years of Conservative government.
Dave’s only mistake was to back the wrong horse.
Depends on your objective. Tories backing Brexit will I am sure turn out to be tactically brilliant in the short term and strategically stupid in the medium to long term. They have destroyed all the party stood for and are rapidly destroying our international reputation and credibility.
But by then, BoJo will be back on the "blethering incoherently to a pissed audience" circuit, so it's Somebody Else's Problem.
Sounds like a fair description of his current role, actually.
From what I have seen of it the issue with the towns fund isn't that it is "mysteriously" going to Tory seats. Its that the same money appears to be crisscrossed over a lot of different palms.
As and when actual money starts appearing, we can assess it then. Until that point it is just hot air, like listening to the Blues Brothers driving round to promote their show making up "its ladies night" on the spot to entice people in.
This isn't a new Blue Labour Cult phenomenon - Brown was fantastic at re-announcing and re-spending the same cash..
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Does the FT not understand the distinction between "town" and "city"?
Given there really isn't much of a distinction between them, that is actually fairly understandable.
I think there's a *huge* distinction between London Boroughs and Mansfield.
Yes, but not between the words 'town' and 'city', in this country at any rate, because there isn't a specific definition of what differentiates a town from a city (not even cathedral presence).
But we do have an official list of cities, and several more bidding for it every few years.
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
I don't see much in it myself. I suspect that with the increasing C2DE Tory vote and decreasing ABC1 vote, that the geography pretty much cancels out the demography. I cannot see SKS overturning the majority in 2023/4 whatever the constituencies.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
That logic rather eludes me. In 2019 we saw a swing of almost 5% to the Tories in a single election. Why can that not be reversed in 2023 or 2024?
It could be, but SKS is far too dull and wooden to do it. A different leader who can show a bit of inspirational zeal might.
'm really struggling to get the 'scandal' with the Towns Fund.
Conservatives run election on promise to level up left behind towns. Those towns flip and vote for the Conservatives in massive numbers. Conservatives follow up by giving development money to said left behind towns.
Does the FT not understand the distinction between "town" and "city"?
Given there really isn't much of a distinction between them, that is actually fairly understandable.
I think there's a *huge* distinction between London Boroughs and Mansfield.
Yes, but not between the words 'town' and 'city', in this country at any rate, because there isn't a specific definition of what differentiates a town from a city (not even cathedral presence).
But we do have an official list of cities, and several more bidding for it every few years.
Apart from Rochester, which I think is one of only three settlements to lose city status and not regain it.
Edit - make that two. Didn’t realise Llanelwy had regained city status.
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
I don't see much in it myself. I suspect that with the increasing C2DE Tory vote and decreasing ABC1 vote, that the geography pretty much cancels out the demography. I cannot see SKS overturning the majority in 2023/4 whatever the constituencies.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
That logic rather eludes me. In 2019 we saw a swing of almost 5% to the Tories in a single election. Why can that not be reversed in 2023 or 2024?
Because labour are moving to be more and more a party of ABC1, they will vote labour to feel good about themselves as long as they don't think labour will hurt them if they get in, or in the case of a corbyn style labour party as long as they don't think they will win
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
I don't see much in it myself. I suspect that with the increasing C2DE Tory vote and decreasing ABC1 vote, that the geography pretty much cancels out the demography. I cannot see SKS overturning the majority in 2023/4 whatever the constituencies.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
Starmer can't win a majority himself without Scotland. All else is noise.
A review gain of 5 to 10 seats feels in the low side, though.
Theory. The big recent Conservative gains have been in left-behind towns. Since those towns are left behind, I'd expect their populations to be declining, so their seat counts to fall. Hence a review that benefits the government bless than maybe expected.
Here are some facts about Magdalen College and HM the Queen. The Middle Common Room is an organisation of graduate students. They don't represent the College. A few years ago, in about 2013, they bought a print of a photo of the Queen to decorate their common room. .....
They recently voted to take it down. Both of these decisions are their own to take, not the College's. Magdalen strongly supports free speech and political debate, and the MCR'S right to autonomy.....
Maybe they'll vote to put it up again, maybe they won't. Meanwhile, the photo will be safely stored.
Nowadays it seems that everything is being "fixed" in order to benefit Johnson and his Gang.
You know the current boundaries are more than 20 years old?
We had two sets of boundary commission reports to fix that.... and they were never implemented.
At one moment it was essential to reduce the number of seats to 600..... and next moment - when the Conservatives won more of these disproportionately small seats - it was suddenly discovered that such a reduction was not necessary after all....
Small wonder people are cynical about the way the country is being run... and for whose benefit.
You’ve written 743 posts and every one of them has been explaining why the Conservatives are/corrupt/evil/malign.
Has there been a single post where you’ve set out positive reasons to vote for the LDs? As a sales technique that seems slightly unwise and yet seems to be one adopted by the LD hierarchy as a whole. Perhaps identify what you stand for and what you will do, what your SP is, before your enemies or, perhaps worse, Layla Moran does it for you.
Recovery takes time but it needs a will to recover. The conservatives decided after Ian Duncan Smith, that they wanted somebody who would at least stop the rot. Perhaps Davey will do that, but on any basis he’s hardly performing even compared to Starmer.
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
I don't see much in it myself. I suspect that with the increasing C2DE Tory vote and decreasing ABC1 vote, that the geography pretty much cancels out the demography. I cannot see SKS overturning the majority in 2023/4 whatever the constituencies.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
Starmer can't win a majority himself without Scotland. All else is noise.
A review gain of 5 to 10 seats feels in the low side, though.
Theory. The big recent Conservative gains have been in left-behind towns. Since those towns are left behind, I'd expect their populations to be declining, so their seat counts to fall. Hence a review that benefits the government bless than maybe expected.
NEW: Gavin Williamson on Oxford removing a portrait of the Queen:
“Oxford students removing a picture of the Queen is absurd. She is the Head of State and a symbol of what is best about the UK. She has worked to promote British values of tolerance, inclusivity & respect”
NEW: Gavin Williamson on Oxford removing a portrait of the Queen:
“Oxford students removing a picture of the Queen is absurd. She is the Head of State and a symbol of what is best about the UK. She has worked to promote British values of tolerance, inclusivity & respect”
Well, it is absurd, but it’s not more absurd than appointing (say) a traitor as Secretary of State for Education or repeatedly appointing a failed investment fund manager and totally incompetent civil servant as the most senior teacher in the land.
NEW: Gavin Williamson on Oxford removing a portrait of the Queen:
“Oxford students removing a picture of the Queen is absurd. She is the Head of State and a symbol of what is best about the UK. She has worked to promote British values of tolerance, inclusivity & respect”
He cannot even swing for an easy culture war target properly. He'd have better luck saying the reason was absurd, not the removal, but even then I don't think it's got that much legs.
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
I don't see much in it myself. I suspect that with the increasing C2DE Tory vote and decreasing ABC1 vote, that the geography pretty much cancels out the demography. I cannot see SKS overturning the majority in 2023/4 whatever the constituencies.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
That logic rather eludes me. In 2019 we saw a swing of almost 5% to the Tories in a single election. Why can that not be reversed in 2023 or 2024?
Agreed, we are living in changing times, lots of people who had only voted one way up to 2015 have for the first time voted for a diffent party, some people voted with a lot of enthusiasm, others with big reservations.
There is every reason to think there could be more change in the next election, at the moment SKS does not seem to be the man to have a big swing to him, but that's only one factor in one possible swing. maybe the the LD or Green or some now party, or maybe just away from this government with all the opposition benefiting.
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
I don't see much in it myself. I suspect that with the increasing C2DE Tory vote and decreasing ABC1 vote, that the geography pretty much cancels out the demography. I cannot see SKS overturning the majority in 2023/4 whatever the constituencies.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
Starmer can't win a majority himself without Scotland. All else is noise.
A review gain of 5 to 10 seats feels in the low side, though.
Theory. The big recent Conservative gains have been in left-behind towns. Since those towns are left behind, I'd expect their populations to be declining, so their seat counts to fall. Hence a review that benefits the government bless than maybe expected.
How easy would that be to check?
First I would check that the populations are actually declining.
The U.S. and the European Union are set to back a renewed push into investigating the origins of Covid-19 after conflicting assessments about where the outbreak started, according to a document seen by Bloomberg News.
The U.S. and the European Union are set to back a renewed push into investigating the origins of Covid-19 after conflicting assessments about where the outbreak started, according to a document seen by Bloomberg News.
The U.S. and the European Union are set to back a renewed push into investigating the origins of Covid-19 after conflicting assessments about where the outbreak started, according to a document seen by Bloomberg News.
Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research
Lab-made coronavirus related to SARS can infect human cells.
An experiment that created a hybrid version of a bat coronavirus — one related to the virus that causes SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) — has triggered renewed debate over whether engineering lab variants of viruses with possible pandemic potential is worth the risks.
In an article published in Nature Medicine1 on 9 November, scientists investigated a virus called SHC014, which is found in horseshoe bats in China. The researchers created a chimaeric virus, made up of a surface protein of SHC014 and the backbone of a SARS virus that had been adapted to grow in mice and to mimic human disease. The chimaera infected human airway cells — proving that the surface protein of SHC014 has the necessary structure to bind to a key receptor on the cells and to infect them. It also caused disease in mice, but did not kill them.
The findings reinforce suspicions that bat coronaviruses capable of directly infecting humans (rather than first needing to evolve in an intermediate animal host) may be more common than previously thought, the researchers say.
But other virologists question whether the information gleaned from the experiment justifies the potential risk. Although the extent of any risk is difficult to assess, Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, points out that the researchers have created a novel virus that “grows remarkably well” in human cells. “If the virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory,” he says.
The U.S. and the European Union are set to back a renewed push into investigating the origins of Covid-19 after conflicting assessments about where the outbreak started, according to a document seen by Bloomberg News.
London gains 3 seats which is slightly surprising. In my part of the world, East Ham loses Beckton and Royal Docks to a new seat called (unsurprisingly) West Ham & Beckton.
We also have Stratford & Bow which I assume is going to take the Stratford & New Town Ward out of West Ham (a recognition of the huge growth of population around Stratford since the current boundaries were created which means West Ham had nearly 100,000 registered voters at the last GE) so instead of the whole of Newham being in just two constituencies it will be in two plus part of a third.
Losing Beckton and Royal Docks will make East Ham even safer for Stephen Timms (the recent by-election result in East Ham Central notwithstanding). West Ham & Beckton is still pretty safe for Labour (though Beckton and Royal Docks were, at 65%, some of the more "marginal" Wards in 2018).
Stratford & New Town was the weakest Labour Ward in Newham in 2018 with just 60% Labour but that will be offset by the staunchly Labour seats in the rest of the constituency.
The U.S. and the European Union are set to back a renewed push into investigating the origins of Covid-19 after conflicting assessments about where the outbreak started, according to a document seen by Bloomberg News.
NEW: Gavin Williamson on Oxford removing a portrait of the Queen:
“Oxford students removing a picture of the Queen is absurd. She is the Head of State and a symbol of what is best about the UK. She has worked to promote British values of tolerance, inclusivity & respect”
Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research
Lab-made coronavirus related to SARS can infect human cells.
An experiment that created a hybrid version of a bat coronavirus — one related to the virus that causes SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) — has triggered renewed debate over whether engineering lab variants of viruses with possible pandemic potential is worth the risks.
In an article published in Nature Medicine1 on 9 November, scientists investigated a virus called SHC014, which is found in horseshoe bats in China. The researchers created a chimaeric virus, made up of a surface protein of SHC014 and the backbone of a SARS virus that had been adapted to grow in mice and to mimic human disease. The chimaera infected human airway cells — proving that the surface protein of SHC014 has the necessary structure to bind to a key receptor on the cells and to infect them. It also caused disease in mice, but did not kill them.
The findings reinforce suspicions that bat coronaviruses capable of directly infecting humans (rather than first needing to evolve in an intermediate animal host) may be more common than previously thought, the researchers say.
But other virologists question whether the information gleaned from the experiment justifies the potential risk. Although the extent of any risk is difficult to assess, Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, points out that the researchers have created a novel virus that “grows remarkably well” in human cells. “If the virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory,” he says.
But we all know that ‘viruses can’t escape from BSL4 labs, that’s impossible’ - a liberal-left factoid which did not trouble the Wuhan lab director, Shi Zhenli, who, when she first heard about Covid, assumed it might have come from her lab
I'm slightly sceptical that the boundary changes give the Cons sny immediate advantage. They have a lot of first-term MPs whose incumbency they are failing to maximise by implementing boundary changes now. Tactically, the time to implement boundary changes is as your vote is ebbing and your incumbency boost as small. Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
I don't see much in it myself. I suspect that with the increasing C2DE Tory vote and decreasing ABC1 vote, that the geography pretty much cancels out the demography. I cannot see SKS overturning the majority in 2023/4 whatever the constituencies.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
That logic rather eludes me. In 2019 we saw a swing of almost 5% to the Tories in a single election. Why can that not be reversed in 2023 or 2024?
Agreed, we are living in changing times, lots of people who had only voted one way up to 2015 have for the first time voted for a diffent party, some people voted with a lot of enthusiasm, others with big reservations.
There is every reason to think there could be more change in the next election, at the moment SKS does not seem to be the man to have a big swing to him, but that's only one factor in one possible swing. maybe the the LD or Green or some now party, or maybe just away from this government with all the opposition benefiting.
That's why its so interesting.
The fact remains the same though. "Conservative" votes (Conservatives and the likes of UKIP etc) is pretty much unified into one bloc. The anti-Conservative vote is splintered.
In fact, it is even worse than the 1990s for Labour because the Greens have added several percentage points to their total, the Lib Dems are weaker at the local level and, of course, there is Scotland.
I don't see yet any evidence of combined anti-Tory tactical voting occurring as it did in 1997 or 2001. Davey doesn't seem to be building bridges to Labour and the Greens sense an opportunity.
Labour is buggered, not at least of all because, if it didn't exist, no one would create it
Going to visit my parents today, they live in outer London so I have to get a commuter train. Trains are all fucked. Train scheduled but the platform is occupied by one that won't leave for ages so the one I need to get is cancelled because no platform is available for it. Honestly, these guys couldn't run a piss up in a brewery. It's the kind of shit that makes me want to smash the whole sector into a million pieces, sack all of the managers and CEOs and nationalise it all and make someone accountable for it. These arseholes have got a monopoly on the line and passengers can do nothing about their incompetence. We're stuck with it, roll on nationalisation and sacking all of these incompentent wankers in charge. I had a look into the CEO of this line and he's got absolutely zero real world experience and no qualifications for the job, just someone who failed upwards and is now failing in the job.
Magdalen College also represents outdated gender relations, theocracy and unwonted elitism.
I think they should just dissolve themselves and be done with it.
..and they pretentiously pronounce it differently to how it is spelt for goodness sake. And, according to Dan Brown (and probably Sean T also) Ms. Magdelene was the bearer of Christ's children! (Sorry the latter bit was just a gratuitous attempt to mock SeanT's "literature")
Although the original theory was quite creative - San Greal was a medieval monk spelling Sang Real wrongly…
There's also the point that any delay should not be prolonged past three or four weeks max - because if any exit wave gets pushed into winter, it will be far uglier than having it in late summer/autumn.
(See James Ward's modelling)
Had a similar thought.
The slow hospitalisations wavelet is what the 'flatten the curve' strategy would have aimed at.
If that's true then we're in this until 2022. I think it's time to leave the country, freedom just won't exist here in any meaningful sense because the government has been captured by the doom mongering scientists who want to keep everyone locked up forever.
The fact remains the same though. "Conservative" votes (Conservatives and the likes of UKIP etc) is pretty much unified into one bloc. The anti-Conservative vote is splintered.
In fact, it is even worse than the 1990s for Labour because the Greens have added several percentage points to their total, the Lib Dems are weaker at the local level and, of course, there is Scotland.
I don't see yet any evidence of combined anti-Tory tactical voting occurring as it did in 1997 or 2001. Davey doesn't seem to be building bridges to Labour and the Greens sense an opportunity.
Labour is buggered, not at least of all because, if it didn't exist, no one would create it
I'm not quite sure what the last sentence means - if it's a comment Labour has failed to adapt to changes in society, maybe, but it has been very successful at re-inventing itself on occasions in the past and may well be so again.
Nothing lasts forever - the "Conservative" vote may fracture again or it may simply diminish, we don't know. The longer a Party is in power, the more mistake sit makes and the more enemies it creates.
Labour will one day be a credible alternative Government again and I suspect when that happens the Conservatives may be the ones facing an existential threat.
Even if there is no actual pact or arrangement, the voters will create one if they want rid of the Conservative Government which one day they will as sure as night follows day.
Going to visit my parents today, they live in outer London so I have to get a commuter train. Trains are all fucked. Train scheduled but the platform is occupied by one that won't leave for ages so the one I need to get is cancelled because no platform is available for it. Honestly, these guys couldn't run a piss up in a brewery. It's the kind of shit that makes me want to smash the whole sector into a million pieces, sack all of the managers and CEOs and nationalise it all and make someone accountable for it. These arseholes have got a monopoly on the line and passengers can do nothing about their incompetence. We're stuck with it, roll on nationalisation and sacking all of these incompentent wankers in charge. I had a look into the CEO of this line and he's got absolutely zero real world experience and no qualifications for the job, just someone who failed upwards and is now failing in the job.
I think you are being very optimistic that a British Rail 2.0 will change such appointments....failing upwards appears to very common among public sector institutions see off the top of my head, the head of the MET.
If that's true then we're in this until 2022. I think it's time to leave the country, freedom just won't exist here in any meaningful sense because the government has been captured by the doom mongering scientists who want to keep everyone locked up forever.
I have the same dark thoughts. I wonder if they will actually tighten the lockdown again
Comments
At one moment it was essential to reduce the number of seats to 600..... and next moment - when the Conservatives won more of these disproportionately small seats - it was suddenly discovered that such a reduction was not necessary after all....
Small wonder people are cynical about the way the country is being run... and for whose benefit.
Absolute classic, we are offended on behalf of people who could be offended, bollocks.
‘Fauci's words are stunning: "You don't wanna go to Hoboken New Jersey or to Fairfax Virginia to be studying the bat-human interface. THAT MIGHT LEAD TO AN OUTBREAK. So you go to China.”’
https://twitter.com/inwuchang/status/1402226563677143043?s=21
https://www.ft.com/content/d485da2a-5778-45ae-9fa8-ca024bc8bbcf
He says he intends to appeal to UKSC directly, will be interesting to see what happens next...
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jun/08/how-the-fbi-and-australian-police-gained-a-front-seat-view-of-underworld-workings-in-90-countries
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19358229.judges-refuse-appeal-attempt-former-diplomat-craig-murray-guilty-alex-salmond-trial-contempt/
https://www.ft.com/__origami/service/image/v2/images/raw/https://d6c748xw2pzm8.cloudfront.net/prod/ed3e0e00-7de2-11eb-9aae-63984ec055de-fullwidth.png?dpr=2&fit=scale-down&quality=medium&source=next&width=1260
The top right (most deprived) places that are Labour held but placed in priority groups 2&3 are: Tower Hamlets, Islington, Salford, Wirral, and Hackney. Or in other words - all in cities.
If he's reported on the case in the same way as other journalists but been subject to a malicious prosecution by the state, then that would violate Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights surely?
Of course, arguably, it shouldn't be a political consideration. But we know politics comes into it.
And in one respecr the 2020 act has been helpful by making it much harder for a government to sit on the outcome, given they cannot use a political excuse that they don't have the numbers to pass it. A future government could change that, but that it is now the case and the future reviews already scheduled within it, means it requires a positive act by a government to do so, which is not as easy as just not fixing a status quo issue.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Heaton/status/1402040869901983748
I see Biden has just posted the above..
I’m struggling to find an alternative explanation for his words
But if it is true, I’d expect a bit more concern than “har de har, they don’t like it up em!”.
It’s called corruption.
We should be against that, wherever it comes from.
Is that what the real experts on this topic think?
I’d expect posters though to say “this is not true” rather than “har de har!”
Oh, me.
She said it was “particularly so, given the enormous publicity which the case in question attracted and continues to attract”.
Murray’s offending blog posts and tweets were written over a period of a month and remained up, unredacted, despite the blogger being told they could potentially lead to the identification of women who had made complaints about Mr Salmond, who was eventually acquitted of all 13 charges.
Lady Dorrian said: “It appears from the posts and articles that he was in fact relishing the task he set himself, which was essentially to allow the identities of complainers to be discerned – which he thought was in the public interest – in a way which did not attract sanction.”
https://www.scotsman.com/news/uk-news/craig-murray-blogger-and-former-diplomat-sentenced-to-eight-months-in-jail-for-contempt-of-court-relating-to-alex-salmond-trial-3232009
Just as lots of people think every boundary review is a fix - I remember a particularly fun comment to that effect for my local constituency last review, with someone wanting a system to ensure only someone who was backed by a majority won. They hadn't seemed to notice the local Tories get over 50%.
https://twitter.com/DinahRoseQC/status/1402318667157803014?s=20
(And arguably the problems isn't so much Brexit as the subsequent soil-salting. Demographics imply that a partial rapprochement will be the will of the British people and a practical necessity. But recent antics are going to mean that someone is going to have to eat a mountain of dung to get there...)
The US vaccination rate is now down to under 1 million a day.
That does not mean this is not an issue or could not soon become one. the last estimate I noticed was that 7% of US cases are of the Delta variety.
Unless of course there are further major events, which are quite possible in a rather unpredictable world.
Though we have already had a temporary virus slump in the polls leading to roughly parity, which had all the longevity of the fuel protest slump.
As and when actual money starts appearing, we can assess it then. Until that point it is just hot air, like listening to the Blues Brothers driving round to promote their show making up "its ladies night" on the spot to entice people in.
This isn't a new Blue Labour Cult phenomenon - Brown was fantastic at re-announcing and re-spending the same cash..
Edit - make that two. Didn’t realise Llanelwy had regained city status.
A review gain of 5 to 10 seats feels in the low side, though.
Theory. The big recent Conservative gains have been in left-behind towns. Since those towns are left behind, I'd expect their populations to be declining, so their seat counts to fall. Hence a review that benefits the government bless than maybe expected.
How easy would that be to check?
The Middle Common Room is an organisation of graduate students. They don't represent the College.
A few years ago, in about 2013, they bought a print of a photo of the Queen to decorate their common room.
.....
They recently voted to take it down.
Both of these decisions are their own to take, not the College's.
Magdalen strongly supports free speech and political debate, and the MCR'S right to autonomy.....
Maybe they'll vote to put it up again, maybe they won't.
Meanwhile, the photo will be safely stored.
https://twitter.com/DinahRoseQC/status/1402329920752295945?s=20
Has there been a single post where you’ve set out positive reasons to vote for the LDs? As a sales technique that seems slightly unwise and yet seems to be one adopted by the LD hierarchy as a whole. Perhaps identify what you stand for and what you will do, what your SP is, before your enemies or, perhaps worse, Layla Moran does it for you.
Recovery takes time but it needs a will to recover. The conservatives decided after Ian Duncan Smith, that they wanted somebody who would at least stop the rot. Perhaps Davey will do that, but on any basis he’s hardly performing even compared to Starmer.
NEW: Gavin Williamson on Oxford removing a portrait of the Queen:
“Oxford students removing a picture of the Queen is absurd. She is the Head of State and a symbol of what is best about the UK. She has worked to promote British values of tolerance, inclusivity & respect”
https://twitter.com/PoliticsForAlI/status/1402333008972206083?s=20
There is every reason to think there could be more change in the next election, at the moment SKS does not seem to be the man to have a big swing to him, but that's only one factor in one possible swing. maybe the the LD or Green or some now party, or maybe just away from this government with all the opposition benefiting.
That's why its so interesting.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-08/u-s-eu-set-to-back-fresh-study-into-origins-of-covid-19
https://youtu.be/SpYUSyeFZag
Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research
Lab-made coronavirus related to SARS can infect human cells.
An experiment that created a hybrid version of a bat coronavirus — one related to the virus that causes SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) — has triggered renewed debate over whether engineering lab variants of viruses with possible pandemic potential is worth the risks.
In an article published in Nature Medicine1 on 9 November, scientists investigated a virus called SHC014, which is found in horseshoe bats in China. The researchers created a chimaeric virus, made up of a surface protein of SHC014 and the backbone of a SARS virus that had been adapted to grow in mice and to mimic human disease. The chimaera infected human airway cells — proving that the surface protein of SHC014 has the necessary structure to bind to a key receptor on the cells and to infect them. It also caused disease in mice, but did not kill them.
The findings reinforce suspicions that bat coronaviruses capable of directly infecting humans (rather than first needing to evolve in an intermediate animal host) may be more common than previously thought, the researchers say.
But other virologists question whether the information gleaned from the experiment justifies the potential risk. Although the extent of any risk is difficult to assess, Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, points out that the researchers have created a novel virus that “grows remarkably well” in human cells. “If the virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory,” he says.
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2015.18787
London gains 3 seats which is slightly surprising. In my part of the world, East Ham loses Beckton and Royal Docks to a new seat called (unsurprisingly) West Ham & Beckton.
We also have Stratford & Bow which I assume is going to take the Stratford & New Town Ward out of West Ham (a recognition of the huge growth of population around Stratford since the current boundaries were created which means West Ham had nearly 100,000 registered voters at the last GE) so instead of the whole of Newham being in just two constituencies it will be in two plus part of a third.
Losing Beckton and Royal Docks will make East Ham even safer for Stephen Timms (the recent by-election result in East Ham Central notwithstanding). West Ham & Beckton is still pretty safe for Labour (though Beckton and Royal Docks were, at 65%, some of the more "marginal" Wards in 2018).
Stratford & New Town was the weakest Labour Ward in Newham in 2018 with just 60% Labour but that will be offset by the staunchly Labour seats in the rest of the constituency.
So they - I will bet they are quite white - are all up for insulting the religion of er... darker coloured people.
Which is basically racism.
I understand that the punishment for racism is banishment for life.
So Let It Be.
In fact, it is even worse than the 1990s for Labour because the Greens have added several percentage points to their total, the Lib Dems are weaker at the local level and, of course, there is Scotland.
I don't see yet any evidence of combined anti-Tory tactical voting occurring as it did in 1997 or 2001. Davey doesn't seem to be building bridges to Labour and the Greens sense an opportunity.
Labour is buggered, not at least of all because, if it didn't exist, no one would create it
Guardian understands chancellor not fixated on 21 June date for enacting final stage of roadmap
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jun/08/sunak-could-accept-four-week-delay-to-ending-covid-restrictions-in-england
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-57406067
The slow hospitalisations wavelet is what the 'flatten the curve' strategy would have aimed at.
Nothing lasts forever - the "Conservative" vote may fracture again or it may simply diminish, we don't know. The longer a Party is in power, the more mistake sit makes and the more enemies it creates.
Labour will one day be a credible alternative Government again and I suspect when that happens the Conservatives may be the ones facing an existential threat.
Even if there is no actual pact or arrangement, the voters will create one if they want rid of the Conservative Government which one day they will as sure as night follows day.