For those like Phillip Thompson who (apparently sincerely) believe that Brexit is all done and dusted and marvellous, here is yet another example of the problems we are facing:
Now you may think this is trivial chaff in the wind but it isn't. We're talking about a shortage of lorry drivers. This isn't some highfalutin or esoteric debate, this is Brexit at the coalface. Trouble among the very people whom Boris wooed in 2019.
It's another reason why the gloss has come off Brand Boris.
If England win Euro 2020 it might stop his slide. Otherwise it's pretty obvious to me and many others that we passed peak Boris a month or so back: May 25th to be precise: the day before Dom Cummings launched the first of his Exocets.
Once again - this has little to nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the working conditions of HGV drivers.
Remember these issues kicked off not in January but from mid April after IR35 changes reduced a lot of agency drivers wages - who have suddenly found that local jobs now pay the same as driving and don't require them being away in a crap cabin overnight.
IR35 is one of the stupidest bits of tax/employment law ever invented. People should be free to set up their business affairs as they see fit, rather than be dictated to by a greedy tax office which always sees more PAYE as a cash cow to be milked.
Two major causes of IR35
- The big consultancies saw alot of contracts being missed because organisation wanted to hire a number of individual contractors but keep the management of the project in house. The big consultancies were heavily tied into New Labour. In fact, comically, Blair asked what was wrong with IR35, since Accenture and McKinsey were both in favour
- In much of government it took a surprisingly long time to ban the practise of leaving your job and coming back as a contractor. This was banned in most private sector companies before 2000. This resulted in large numbers of the Professional Management class in government swapping from payroll to contracting. Suddenly, some *council* jobs paid more than the PM... As for the NHS..... The result was envy and rage throughout alot of permanent governmental structure.
The latter point is definetely true, you could reduce your tax from 50% to 20% by reemerging as a contractor. I tend to take the view that you must pay as little tax as you can whilst following the rules, but it somehow felt unethical to take advantage of this arrangement.
As for labour shortages - good if your wage goes up but this is bound to be passed on in rising prices and inflation. I've been trying to buy bike parts recently, they are selling for 30% over list price on amazon.
The swapping of jobs to contracting became an epidemic in local government and the NHS. Complete with discovering management consultancy style rates per day - it wasn't simply give-the-contractor-their-cost-of-employment.
As to the first point - Quite a few Labour voters/supporters thought that IR35 was going to hit the big consultancies! The fact that it actually helps them is unsurprising, since they backed New Labour to win. Arthur Anderson etc....
Wasn’t the public sector use of consultants, mostly due to the fact they their engagement wasn’t considered part of the carefully-controlled staffing budget?
The whole contractor vs employee argument isn’t going away, in a number of sectors. The long-term solution involves phasing out the concept of employer NI - it is simply a tax on jobs.
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Fair play to Nick Palmer, who called this to perfection. Has the Boris magic started to wane, or was it waning already and Hartlepool was a chimera?
The Tories won’t be too upset.
They’ve turned a 21.7% Labour lead in 2017, to a 6.7% lead in 2019 and now a 0.9% lead. Will be on the target list for the next election, without the GG factor.
That Labour squeaked the win, has also called off the far-left mob trying to unseat Starmer.
I think the Tories would prefer Starmer gone so a Tory win would have been very useful for them. Although Starmer has been pretty ineffective, he is moderate and if he was replaced by a left winger then all the Tories seats in the south would be safe as it would scare the voters here. That would make a Tory victory at the next election certain. As it stands at the moment the Tories aren't sure if they will lose seats in the South to counter balance the Red Wall.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
I think I've been highlighting this for the past 3 weeks. According to the twins wages are definitely rising - the teenagers in Bowness Co-op and Tesco have / are moving elsewhere as wages elsewhere are now higher than those chains national payscales.
I was in Bowness Tesco a lot over the past week. Worst Tesco ever.
Matt Hancock had pushed for the reforms, but Javid is much cooler, warning the Pm: "All health Bills are, by their very nature, controversial and in the context of the fight against Covid, this will be even more so."
The new health secretary told the PM that Covid has “so far distracted political attention from these reforms, but as we move further into the recovery phase of the pandemic the controversies of this Bill are likely to grow”.
But Downing Street told him there was no time to lose as delaying the bill beyond parliament's summer recess would mean new NHS structures would not be ready by April next year
How is this stuff getting leaked already? Sounds like Javid knows it will be difficult for him to get forced out!
Nice win since I threw a few hopeful quid on Lab late in the day at the silly looking 7. But this in no way burnishes my superforecaster credentials. It was all hope rather than expectation.
Kudos in this case to others. Those who actually called the result. The likes of @HYUFD and @OnlyLivingBoy and @apologiesforomissions. Also @Cookie with his 20/1 tip on low Con vote share. And - although he got the result wrong - @AndyJS who was right about a strong showing from Gruesome Gurning George.
Have you forgotten the bloke who told you there was no equivalent of the Ben Houchen bandwagon effect in Batley ?
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
I think I've been highlighting this for the past 3 weeks. According to the twins wages are definitely rising - the teenagers in Bowness Co-op and Tesco have / are moving elsewhere as wages elsewhere are now higher than those chains national payscales.
My youngest has had a couple of jobs that did not last during the pandemic - he has finally landed a job and he was very pleasantly surprised by the wages being offered.
Amusingly they wanted him to work more hours than he wanted to commit to. That lasted 2 shifts during which he has formed a friendship with a young lady who works there.
For some reason he now seems open to working more days
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
Hospitality vacancies are everywhere. But then you have over two million on furlough still. Many of those jobs will go when furlough is withdrawn so some of these vacancies will be filled.
Anecdotal, but when we were having a meal locally I spoke to the restaurant manager and he said a few of their former staff had got jobs on the same salary but more social hours in local supermarkets and warehouses.
The number of vaccancies is a good sign, that the ending of the furlough scheme isn’t going to dump a couple of million people on the dole - although I doubt BA and EasyJet captains are going to pay their school fees working in Tesco or Wetherspoons.
As @Philip_Thompson points out, the end result will be wages going up for working antisocial hours. Which is a good thing.
For those like Phillip Thompson who (apparently sincerely) believe that Brexit is all done and dusted and marvellous, here is yet another example of the problems we are facing:
Now you may think this is trivial chaff in the wind but it isn't. We're talking about a shortage of lorry drivers. This isn't some highfalutin or esoteric debate, this is Brexit at the coalface. Trouble among the very people whom Boris wooed in 2019.
It's another reason why the gloss has come off Brand Boris.
If England win Euro 2020 it might stop his slide. Otherwise it's pretty obvious to me and many others that we passed peak Boris a month or so back: May 25th to be precise: the day before Dom Cummings launched the first of his Exocets.
Once again - this has little to nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the working conditions of HGV drivers.
Remember these issues kicked off not in January but from mid April after IR35 changes reduced a lot of agency drivers wages - who have suddenly found that local jobs now pay the same as driving and don't require them being away in a crap cabin overnight.
IR35 is one of the stupidest bits of tax/employment law ever invented. People should be free to set up their business affairs as they see fit, rather than be dictated to by a greedy tax office which always sees more PAYE as a cash cow to be milked.
Two major causes of IR35
- The big consultancies saw alot of contracts being missed because organisation wanted to hire a number of individual contractors but keep the management of the project in house. The big consultancies were heavily tied into New Labour. In fact, comically, Blair asked what was wrong with IR35, since Accenture and McKinsey were both in favour
- In much of government it took a surprisingly long time to ban the practise of leaving your job and coming back as a contractor. This was banned in most private sector companies before 2000. This resulted in large numbers of the Professional Management class in government swapping from payroll to contracting. Suddenly, some *council* jobs paid more than the PM... As for the NHS..... The result was envy and rage throughout alot of permanent governmental structure.
The latter point is definetely true, you could reduce your tax from 50% to 20% by reemerging as a contractor. I tend to take the view that you must pay as little tax as you can whilst following the rules, but it somehow felt unethical to take advantage of this arrangement.
As for labour shortages - good if your wage goes up but this is bound to be passed on in rising prices and inflation. I've been trying to buy bike parts recently, they are selling for 30% over list price on amazon.
The swapping of jobs to contracting became an epidemic in local government and the NHS. Complete with discovering management consultancy style rates per day - it wasn't simply give-the-contractor-their-cost-of-employment.
As to the first point - Quite a few Labour voters/supporters thought that IR35 was going to hit the big consultancies! The fact that it actually helps them is unsurprising, since they backed New Labour to win. Arthur Anderson etc....
Wasn’t the public sector use of consultants, mostly due to the fact they their engagement wasn’t considered part of the carefully-controlled staffing budget?
The whole contractor vs employee argument isn’t going away, in a number of sectors. The long-term solution involves phasing out the concept of employer NI - it is simply a tax on jobs.
The problem is they can't as Employer NI is now worth £40bn a year...
Remember that for years the Tories stated they wouldn't increase VAT, Income tax and Employee NI so ended up increasing Employer NI as that was the only game left in town that could be increased.
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
I think I've been highlighting this for the past 3 weeks. According to the twins wages are definitely rising - the teenagers in Bowness Co-op and Tesco have / are moving elsewhere as wages elsewhere are now higher than those chains national payscales.
I was in Bowness Tesco a lot over the past week. Worst Tesco ever.
No, no....I won't have that, there is a place in Eastbourne!
Some talk in Tower Hamlets that George Galloway is keeping an eye on upcoming trial of Apsana Begum (due later this month). Should she be convicted of housing fraud (charges she denies) her Poplar & Limehouse seat will be up for grabs. That said Galloway got thumped there in 2010 https://twitter.com/TedJeory/status/1410891217768955908
For those like Phillip Thompson who (apparently sincerely) believe that Brexit is all done and dusted and marvellous, here is yet another example of the problems we are facing:
Now you may think this is trivial chaff in the wind but it isn't. We're talking about a shortage of lorry drivers. This isn't some highfalutin or esoteric debate, this is Brexit at the coalface. Trouble among the very people whom Boris wooed in 2019.
It's another reason why the gloss has come off Brand Boris.
If England win Euro 2020 it might stop his slide. Otherwise it's pretty obvious to me and many others that we passed peak Boris a month or so back: May 25th to be precise: the day before Dom Cummings launched the first of his Exocets.
Once again - this has little to nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the working conditions of HGV drivers.
Remember these issues kicked off not in January but from mid April after IR35 changes reduced a lot of agency drivers wages - who have suddenly found that local jobs now pay the same as driving and don't require them being away in a crap cabin overnight.
IR35 is one of the stupidest bits of tax/employment law ever invented. People should be free to set up their business affairs as they see fit, rather than be dictated to by a greedy tax office which always sees more PAYE as a cash cow to be milked.
Two major causes of IR35
- The big consultancies saw alot of contracts being missed because organisation wanted to hire a number of individual contractors but keep the management of the project in house. The big consultancies were heavily tied into New Labour. In fact, comically, Blair asked what was wrong with IR35, since Accenture and McKinsey were both in favour
- In much of government it took a surprisingly long time to ban the practise of leaving your job and coming back as a contractor. This was banned in most private sector companies before 2000. This resulted in large numbers of the Professional Management class in government swapping from payroll to contracting. Suddenly, some *council* jobs paid more than the PM... As for the NHS..... The result was envy and rage throughout alot of permanent governmental structure.
The latter point is definetely true, you could reduce your tax from 50% to 20% by reemerging as a contractor. I tend to take the view that you must pay as little tax as you can whilst following the rules, but it somehow felt unethical to take advantage of this arrangement.
As for labour shortages - good if your wage goes up but this is bound to be passed on in rising prices and inflation. I've been trying to buy bike parts recently, they are selling for 30% over list price on amazon.
The swapping of jobs to contracting became an epidemic in local government and the NHS. Complete with discovering management consultancy style rates per day - it wasn't simply give-the-contractor-their-cost-of-employment.
As to the first point - Quite a few Labour voters/supporters thought that IR35 was going to hit the big consultancies! The fact that it actually helps them is unsurprising, since they backed New Labour to win. Arthur Anderson etc....
Wasn’t the public sector use of consultants, mostly due to the fact they their engagement wasn’t considered part of the carefully-controlled staffing budget?
The whole contractor vs employee argument isn’t going away, in a number of sectors. The long-term solution involves phasing out the concept of employer NI - it is simply a tax on jobs.
Contracting had some advantages
- Employee people at the market rate, rather than internal job banding. For social reason you can't pay an employee more than their manager, apparently. But paying a contractor x times more works... - As you say, head count. Though that is largely bullshit, of course. Since the cost of employing contractors long term (year+) .... - Government was fairly unique in that they were allowing swapping PAYE to contracting in the same job. This happened briefly in the private sector, but was stamped out a long while back. If you are in private employment, look in your contract. There will, almost certainly, be a clause in their preventing you being re-employed in your job as a contractor.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
The qualities or otherwise of the SecGen are largely irrelevant as NATO exists to enable US strategic doctrine. The real leadership is and always will be in the Pentagon. The NATO CinC (SACEUR) is always American and the matter is not open to question.
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
I think I've been highlighting this for the past 3 weeks. According to the twins wages are definitely rising - the teenagers in Bowness Co-op and Tesco have / are moving elsewhere as wages elsewhere are now higher than those chains national payscales.
I was in Bowness Tesco a lot over the past week. Worst Tesco ever.
I know you don't have much cash at the moment - but just use Booths.
Fair play to Nick Palmer, who called this to perfection. Has the Boris magic started to wane, or was it waning already and Hartlepool was a chimera?
Too early to make this kind of assessment. It was a by-election with a low turnout and their vote share was at the same level as historic averages, and the unfortunate Hancock scandal will have suppressed their vote.
I think that Boris will keep find ways of renewing the conservative offer. He has reinvented the party already pursuing previously unthinkable popular policies, it is a completely different party to that which existed before. I think it has a long run ahead of it.
Boris's offer is simply chucking taxpayers' money around to buy himself popularity. It's crude but effective. How long it will keep him in power - and the longer-term damage it will bring about - is yet to be decided.
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
I think I've been highlighting this for the past 3 weeks. According to the twins wages are definitely rising - the teenagers in Bowness Co-op and Tesco have / are moving elsewhere as wages elsewhere are now higher than those chains national payscales.
Increasing pay can help you short term as you can draw in workers from elsewhere. Unless the increased pay actually brings more people into the pool wanting those jobs then the shortage is just moved around.
This is the issues with truck drivers. Pay is not the issue - there aren't enough drivers. Until more people join the pool of qualified drivers there is no pay solution to stop the nationwide problem.
"Elections are bruising and it takes bravery to stand. Thank you to @Stephenson_Ryan for fighting the campaign on the issues and not pandering to divisions. We may disagree on a lot but he’s a good man and has more to give."
In case it's not obvious - this is Jo Cox's husband
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Yes, I'm with you. I would have thought that Galloway getting 8K votes would spell the death knell for Labour's chances, but it didn't.
Of course it was a Labour hold, and should have been. But those PB Tories spinning that it wasn't a failure for the Tories are being disingenuous. It wasn't just the bookies who were confident the Tories would win - it was CCHQ as well. The fact that they couldn't pull it off even with Galloway splitting the vote is telling.
Finally, if I were a Tory I'd be worried that it wasn't Hancock himself that made the difference. It was Johnson's failure to sack him, followed by him sort of implying that he had sacked him really. The PM is weak, weak, weak.
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
I think I've been highlighting this for the past 3 weeks. According to the twins wages are definitely rising - the teenagers in Bowness Co-op and Tesco have / are moving elsewhere as wages elsewhere are now higher than those chains national payscales.
Increasing pay can help you short term as you can draw in workers from elsewhere. Unless the increased pay actually brings more people into the pool wanting those jobs then the shortage is just moved around.
This is the issues with truck drivers. Pay is not the issue - there aren't enough drivers. Until more people join the pool of qualified drivers there is no pay solution to stop the nationwide problem.
Or maybe the companies looking for HGV drivers, should invest in a training scheme.
So a month ago the Conservatives expected two more MPS by today and there was none. A real one in the eye for the right wing press, especially the Express. Lib Dems won Cobham last night on a big swing.
On topic. You don’t even need to give it a modest mention. It’s now obvious to all without pointing us to it. Mike Smithson wisest psephologist around today.
Exactly why Labour won doesn’t need to be analysed this morning, we already had header after header for all the reasons printed here BEFORE the Polling
Nice win since I threw a few hopeful quid on Lab late in the day at the silly looking 7. But this in no way burnishes my superforecaster credentials. It was all hope rather than expectation.
Kudos in this case to others. Those who actually called the result. The likes of @HYUFD and @OnlyLivingBoy and @apologiesforomissions. Also @Cookie with his 20/1 tip on low Con vote share. And - although he got the result wrong - @AndyJS who was right about a strong showing from Gruesome Gurning George.
Have you forgotten the bloke who told you there was no equivalent of the Ben Houchen bandwagon effect in Batley ?
I never forget you, Richard. But did you say both that (which is a soft, under-the-counter thing) plus the hard, visible thing that Labour were winning this? If you did, fair play and hats off and smug city and all the rest of it.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
But both arguments assume that Johnson will do what's best for NATO/Britain/Europe/the Tories - rather than what's best for Johnson. If he thinks he'll gain from shunting May off to NATO, then it will matter not a jot that he's putting a vulnerable seat up in a by-election, or putting a square peg in a round hole.
Nice win since I threw a few hopeful quid on Lab late in the day at the silly looking 7. But this in no way burnishes my superforecaster credentials. It was all hope rather than expectation.
Kudos in this case to others. Those who actually called the result. The likes of @HYUFD and @OnlyLivingBoy and @apologiesforomissions. Also @Cookie with his 20/1 tip on low Con vote share. And - although he got the result wrong - @AndyJS who was right about a strong showing from Gruesome Gurning George.
Have you forgotten the bloke who told you there was no equivalent of the Ben Houchen bandwagon effect in Batley ?
There may not be a Ben Houchen bandwagon on Teesside for long either. Amazing as it might be, Ben Houchen International is not viable as an airport. In the past there were flights to London and to sunspots and not enough bums on seats so the flights were withdrawn.
Its now publicly owned, it continues to make huge losses, the announced flights already being cancelled before they have even got going and the boy has had to tip another £10m of public money into the black hole.
He was elected in 2016 on two pledges - bring back Teesside International Airport, and protect the parmo from the EU. The airport needs to actually be a going concern though, and like every other small regional airport it doesn't make sense for the airlines to serve it.
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Was this his Adrian Heath/ Mark Robbins (delete according to Everton or Man U allegiance) moment?
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
I agree on the last point, certainly and the vote changes suggest that Con Lab switchers (if they exist) were fewer than Lab GG switchers. Without GG, the margin of victory would likely be higher for Labour. Just seen Diane Abbott on BBC news, and she outright refused to comment if this was a good result for Starmer. It was, and I hope he uses this breathing space effectively. I don't want policy just yet (Johnson would just nick the best stuff and I think Starmer knows it), but values and first principles should be defined.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
But both arguments assume that Johnson will do what's best for NATO/Britain/Europe/the Tories - rather than what's best for Johnson. If he thinks he'll gain from shunting May off to NATO, then it will matter not a jot that he's putting a vulnerable seat up in a by-election, or putting a square peg in a round hole.
That's a very good reason for Boris to want rid of her. Wasn't that a scene in Borgen or similar, about sending unwanted politicians to the EU. Shunting them off to NATO seems a reasonable alternative.
But why would the rest of NATO play along? Why would they agree to her candidacy?
Nice win since I threw a few hopeful quid on Lab late in the day at the silly looking 7. But this in no way burnishes my superforecaster credentials. It was all hope rather than expectation.
Kudos in this case to others. Those who actually called the result. The likes of @HYUFD and @OnlyLivingBoy and @apologiesforomissions. Also @Cookie with his 20/1 tip on low Con vote share. And - although he got the result wrong - @AndyJS who was right about a strong showing from Gruesome Gurning George.
Have you forgotten the bloke who told you there was no equivalent of the Ben Houchen bandwagon effect in Batley ?
There may not be a Ben Houchen bandwagon on Teesside for long either. Amazing as it might be, Ben Houchen International is not viable as an airport. In the past there were flights to London and to sunspots and not enough bums on seats so the flights were withdrawn.
Its now publicly owned, it continues to make huge losses, the announced flights already being cancelled before they have even got going and the boy has had to tip another £10m of public money into the black hole.
He was elected in 2016 on two pledges - bring back Teesside International Airport, and protect the parmo from the EU. The airport needs to actually be a going concern though, and like every other small regional airport it doesn't make sense for the airlines to serve it.
Another reason for the third runway at Heathrow - right now the landing slots at LHR change hands for tens of millions, so smaller, regional carriers are shut out in favour of long haul carriers with large aircraft.
The number of vaccancies is a good sign, that the ending of the furlough scheme isn’t going to dump a couple of million people on the dole - although I doubt BA and EasyJet captains are going to pay their school fees working in Tesco or Wetherspoons.
Covid is somewhat of a blessing for BA as they can use it to clear out all the old stagers on the super generous World Fleet contracts. When the long haul operation is reconstituted it will be crews on the new stingy Mixed contracts.
I have a couple of old squadronmates on the 747 fleet. Both are on furlough; one is detailing cars and the other is cutting lawns. Neither expects to fly again. I chopped one of them from his Hawk course many years ago and I have no idea how or why he ever had any job in aviation.
We have some Dutch friends with a daughter called Siri, I don't believe this has been a problem for them - as noted in the article, their pronunciation is more 'see-ree'. Cortana and Bixby are presumably rare enough (and invoked rarely enough, particularly by the kids) to not be a problem!
On topic. You don’t even need to give it a modest mention. It’s now obvious to all without pointing us to it. Mike Smithson wisest psephologist around today.
Exactly why Labour won doesn’t need to be analysed this morning, we already had header after header for all the reasons printed here BEFORE the Polling
Nice win since I threw a few hopeful quid on Lab late in the day at the silly looking 7. But this in no way burnishes my superforecaster credentials. It was all hope rather than expectation.
Kudos in this case to others. Those who actually called the result. The likes of @HYUFD and @OnlyLivingBoy and @apologiesforomissions. Also @Cookie with his 20/1 tip on low Con vote share. And - although he got the result wrong - @AndyJS who was right about a strong showing from Gruesome Gurning George.
Have you forgotten the bloke who told you there was no equivalent of the Ben Houchen bandwagon effect in Batley ?
There may not be a Ben Houchen bandwagon on Teesside for long either. Amazing as it might be, Ben Houchen International is not viable as an airport. In the past there were flights to London and to sunspots and not enough bums on seats so the flights were withdrawn.
Its now publicly owned, it continues to make huge losses, the announced flights already being cancelled before they have even got going and the boy has had to tip another £10m of public money into the black hole.
He was elected in 2016 on two pledges - bring back Teesside International Airport, and protect the parmo from the EU. The airport needs to actually be a going concern though, and like every other small regional airport it doesn't make sense for the airlines to serve it.
What he needs to do is to arrange a steady supply of photo opportunities in the area for the PM - and other Cabinet ministers - and then ensure that they fly up from London on the Flag Plane, which can be charged an appropriately eye-wateringly steep landing fee for an unscheduled flight.
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
I think I've been highlighting this for the past 3 weeks. According to the twins wages are definitely rising - the teenagers in Bowness Co-op and Tesco have / are moving elsewhere as wages elsewhere are now higher than those chains national payscales.
I was in Bowness Tesco a lot over the past week. Worst Tesco ever.
I know you don't have much cash at the moment - but just use Booths.
On topic. You don’t even need to give it a modest mention. It’s now obvious to all without pointing us to it. Mike Smithson wisest psephologist around today.
Exactly why Labour won doesn’t need to be analysed this morning, we already had header after header for all the reasons printed here BEFORE the Polling
A very wise post
Indeed. Worthy of an ‘Order of the Brown Nose’ medal.
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Yes, I'm with you. I would have thought that Galloway getting 8K votes would spell the death knell for Labour's chances, but it didn't.
Of course it was a Labour hold, and should have been. But those PB Tories spinning that it wasn't a failure for the Tories are being disingenuous. It wasn't just the bookies who were confident the Tories would win - it was CCHQ as well. The fact that they couldn't pull it off even with Galloway splitting the vote is telling.
Finally, if I were a Tory I'd be worried that it wasn't Hancock himself that made the difference. It was Johnson's failure to sack him, followed by him sort of implying that he had sacked him really. The PM is weak, weak, weak.
Weak and if you ask me a teeny bit tawdry too. We only need a few % of those who went with him in 2019 to see it and say, "Ok, enough of this" for things to get tight again. And all that "jab" nonsense will fade soon. I'm feeling quite bullish. Not as bullish as for the football but definitely it's looking up on the old politics front.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
But both arguments assume that Johnson will do what's best for NATO/Britain/Europe/the Tories - rather than what's best for Johnson. If he thinks he'll gain from shunting May off to NATO, then it will matter not a jot that he's putting a vulnerable seat up in a by-election, or putting a square peg in a round hole.
I don't think giving the Lib Dems the feeling of real momentum in the south with a (Going by Chesham) probable win in Maidenhead would do him any favours at all as suddenly a whole bunch of home counties Tory backbenchers become worried about their seats. But he probably won't think that far ahead.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
But both arguments assume that Johnson will do what's best for NATO/Britain/Europe/the Tories - rather than what's best for Johnson. If he thinks he'll gain from shunting May off to NATO, then it will matter not a jot that he's putting a vulnerable seat up in a by-election, or putting a square peg in a round hole.
That's a very good reason for Boris to want rid of her. Wasn't that a scene in Borgen or similar, about sending unwanted politicians to the EU. Shunting them off to NATO seems a reasonable alternative.
But why would the rest of NATO play along? Why would they agree to her candidacy?
Former leader of a major country - would give NATO a bit of added prestige as to the importance of the role and the organisation as a whole.
For those like Phillip Thompson who (apparently sincerely) believe that Brexit is all done and dusted and marvellous, here is yet another example of the problems we are facing:
Now you may think this is trivial chaff in the wind but it isn't. We're talking about a shortage of lorry drivers. This isn't some highfalutin or esoteric debate, this is Brexit at the coalface. Trouble among the very people whom Boris wooed in 2019.
It's another reason why the gloss has come off Brand Boris.
If England win Euro 2020 it might stop his slide. Otherwise it's pretty obvious to me and many others that we passed peak Boris a month or so back: May 25th to be precise: the day before Dom Cummings launched the first of his Exocets.
Once again - this has little to nothing to do with Brexit and everything to do with the working conditions of HGV drivers.
Remember these issues kicked off not in January but from mid April after IR35 changes reduced a lot of agency drivers wages - who have suddenly found that local jobs now pay the same as driving and don't require them being away in a crap cabin overnight.
IR35 is one of the stupidest bits of tax/employment law ever invented. People should be free to set up their business affairs as they see fit, rather than be dictated to by a greedy tax office which always sees more PAYE as a cash cow to be milked.
Two major causes of IR35
- The big consultancies saw alot of contracts being missed because organisation wanted to hire a number of individual contractors but keep the management of the project in house. The big consultancies were heavily tied into New Labour. In fact, comically, Blair asked what was wrong with IR35, since Accenture and McKinsey were both in favour
- In much of government it took a surprisingly long time to ban the practise of leaving your job and coming back as a contractor. This was banned in most private sector companies before 2000. This resulted in large numbers of the Professional Management class in government swapping from payroll to contracting. Suddenly, some *council* jobs paid more than the PM... As for the NHS..... The result was envy and rage throughout a lot of permanent governmental structure.
Your point about the big consultancies and New Labour is very well observed. New Labour were very cosy with them and other favoured parts of big business. They instinctively disliked and distrusted independent contractors and small businesses. Ironically many of us in the IT sector being good left wingers voted and campaigned for them. Also being good left wingers didn't make to much of a fuss about massive outsourcing to India. With the benefit of hindsight it is clear that New Labour were unconsciously promoting corporatism that was structurally similar to Italian Fascism but more benign an a bit more light touch.
On topic. You don’t even need to give it a modest mention. It’s now obvious to all without pointing us to it. Mike Smithson wisest psephologist around today.
Exactly why Labour won doesn’t need to be analysed this morning, we already had header after header for all the reasons printed here BEFORE the Polling
A very wise post
It’s a moment that brings the site home as a place in political history. A site designed to help people place money on political bets not merely called the last two bi elections, but informed punters why before the votes were counted.
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
Hospitality vacancies are everywhere. But then you have over two million on furlough still. Many of those jobs will go when furlough is withdrawn so some of these vacancies will be filled.
Anecdotal, but when we were having a meal locally I spoke to the restaurant manager and he said a few of their former staff had got jobs on the same salary but more social hours in local supermarkets and warehouses.
The number of vaccancies is a good sign, that the ending of the furlough scheme isn’t going to dump a couple of million people on the dole - although I doubt BA and EasyJet captains are going to pay their school fees working in Tesco or Wetherspoons.
As @Philip_Thompson points out, the end result will be wages going up for working antisocial hours. Which is a good thing.
Your first paragraph nails it. Job vacancies and people out of work are not a straight fit solution to each other. Are the jobs on offer suitable for the people seeking employment and vice versa. We are bound to see both a big list of job vacancies and a significant number of people coming off furlough into a lack of work.
The number of vaccancies is a good sign, that the ending of the furlough scheme isn’t going to dump a couple of million people on the dole - although I doubt BA and EasyJet captains are going to pay their school fees working in Tesco or Wetherspoons.
Covid is somewhat of a blessing for BA as they can use it to clear out all the old stagers on the super generous World Fleet contracts. When the long haul operation is reconstituted it will be crews on the new stingy Mixed contracts.
I have a couple of old squadronmates on the 747 fleet. Both are on furlough; one is detailing cars and the other is cutting lawns. Neither expects to fly again. I chopped one of them from his Hawk course many years ago and I have no idea how or why he ever had any job in aviation.
Haven't BA scrapped their 747s? I can imagine that the only reason they haven't been made redundant already is a combination of furlough and BA being polite.
Some talk in Tower Hamlets that George Galloway is keeping an eye on upcoming trial of Apsana Begum (due later this month). Should she be convicted of housing fraud (charges she denies) her Poplar & Limehouse seat will be up for grabs. That said Galloway got thumped there in 2010 https://twitter.com/TedJeory/status/1410891217768955908
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Was this his Adrian Heath/ Mark Robbins (delete according to Everton or Man U allegiance) moment?
Yep - or (for me) the Poulter Ryder Cup putt on the Saturday at Medinah 2012.
Not 'wot done it' but 'wot made wot followed possible'.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
But both arguments assume that Johnson will do what's best for NATO/Britain/Europe/the Tories - rather than what's best for Johnson. If he thinks he'll gain from shunting May off to NATO, then it will matter not a jot that he's putting a vulnerable seat up in a by-election, or putting a square peg in a round hole.
That's a very good reason for Boris to want rid of her. Wasn't that a scene in Borgen or similar, about sending unwanted politicians to the EU. Shunting them off to NATO seems a reasonable alternative.
But why would the rest of NATO play along? Why would they agree to her candidacy?
Plus points for the rest of NATO.
1. Prestige of a former UK PM taking the role. I think the last British Secretary General was George Robinson (or was it Robertson?), one of the Blair-era defence secretaries. 2. She'd be seen as a realist from the European point of view of her Brexit experience. Far superior for that reason, in their view, then any British candidate with better links to Johnson.
Nice win since I threw a few hopeful quid on Lab late in the day at the silly looking 7. But this in no way burnishes my superforecaster credentials. It was all hope rather than expectation.
Kudos in this case to others. Those who actually called the result. The likes of @HYUFD and @OnlyLivingBoy and @apologiesforomissions. Also @Cookie with his 20/1 tip on low Con vote share. And - although he got the result wrong - @AndyJS who was right about a strong showing from Gruesome Gurning George.
Have you forgotten the bloke who told you there was no equivalent of the Ben Houchen bandwagon effect in Batley ?
There may not be a Ben Houchen bandwagon on Teesside for long either. Amazing as it might be, Ben Houchen International is not viable as an airport. In the past there were flights to London and to sunspots and not enough bums on seats so the flights were withdrawn.
Its now publicly owned, it continues to make huge losses, the announced flights already being cancelled before they have even got going and the boy has had to tip another £10m of public money into the black hole.
He was elected in 2016 on two pledges - bring back Teesside International Airport, and protect the parmo from the EU. The airport needs to actually be a going concern though, and like every other small regional airport it doesn't make sense for the airlines to serve it.
Another reason for the third runway at Heathrow - right now the landing slots at LHR change hands for tens of millions, so smaller, regional carriers are shut out in favour of long haul carriers with large aircraft.
We should have built that a decade ago. However I would now advise caution - lets see what travel patterns look like post-Covid first. It would be classic British planning stupidity to not build what obviously needed building for decades and then build it late as a white elephant.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
But both arguments assume that Johnson will do what's best for NATO/Britain/Europe/the Tories - rather than what's best for Johnson. If he thinks he'll gain from shunting May off to NATO, then it will matter not a jot that he's putting a vulnerable seat up in a by-election, or putting a square peg in a round hole.
I don't think giving the Lib Dems the feeling of real momentum in the south with a (Going by Chesham) probable win in Maidenhead would do him any favours at all as suddenly a whole bunch of home counties Tory backbenchers become worried about their seats. But he probably won't think that far ahead.
Boris won't think ahead and probably still wants potential awkward squad members removed.
The number of vaccancies is a good sign, that the ending of the furlough scheme isn’t going to dump a couple of million people on the dole - although I doubt BA and EasyJet captains are going to pay their school fees working in Tesco or Wetherspoons.
Covid is somewhat of a blessing for BA as they can use it to clear out all the old stagers on the super generous World Fleet contracts. When the long haul operation is reconstituted it will be crews on the new stingy Mixed contracts.
I have a couple of old squadronmates on the 747 fleet. Both are on furlough; one is detailing cars and the other is cutting lawns. Neither expects to fly again. I chopped one of them from his Hawk course many years ago and I have no idea how or why he ever had any job in aviation.
Even before the pandemic, it was said that BA was a pension scheme that happened to have some planes, paying for more retired pilots than active pilots. They used to retire them at 55, would spend in many cases more time retired (on some bonkers percentage of a six-figure final salary) than they did working.
Sadly the 747 fleet has been a victim of the pandemic, and as you say there will be little appetite to retrain the older pilots on expensive contracts for the 777/787 fleets. AIUI the long-standing senior Captains were on close to £200k.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
But both arguments assume that Johnson will do what's best for NATO/Britain/Europe/the Tories - rather than what's best for Johnson. If he thinks he'll gain from shunting May off to NATO, then it will matter not a jot that he's putting a vulnerable seat up in a by-election, or putting a square peg in a round hole.
That's a very good reason for Boris to want rid of her. Wasn't that a scene in Borgen or similar, about sending unwanted politicians to the EU. Shunting them off to NATO seems a reasonable alternative.
But why would the rest of NATO play along? Why would they agree to her candidacy?
Former leader of a major country - would give NATO a bit of added prestige as to the importance of the role and the organisation as a whole.
May supported Biden last year and had an amicable relationship with Macron and Trudeau and an effective working relationship with Merkel so I suspect most of the big NATO members would back her candidacy, whether Boris puts her forward is the question
We have some Dutch friends with a daughter called Siri, I don't believe this has been a problem for them - as noted in the article, their pronunciation is more 'see-ree'. Cortana and Bixby are presumably rare enough (and invoked rarely enough, particularly by the kids) to not be a problem!
Slow news day at the BBC?
Or someone reasonably high up has a daughter by that name? And favour is being curried?
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Was this his Adrian Heath/ Mark Robbins (delete according to Everton or Man U allegiance) moment?
Yep - or (for me) the Poulter Ryder Cup putt on the Saturday at Medinah 2012.
Not 'wot done it' but 'wot made wot followed possible'.
Do think after Johnson there may be a market for honest and uncharismatic. And to add, willing to graft rather than grift.
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
The biggest winner last night is clearly Starmer, the Labour hold in Batley has torpedoed potential leadership bids by Nandy and Rayner and he is now likely safe until the next general election.
However he would have to get a hung parliament and become PM after that election to then see off a potential challenge from Burnham if as likely he has returned to the Commons by then
We have some Dutch friends with a daughter called Siri, I don't believe this has been a problem for them - as noted in the article, their pronunciation is more 'see-ree'. Cortana and Bixby are presumably rare enough (and invoked rarely enough, particularly by the kids) to not be a problem!
Slow news day at the BBC?
Or someone reasonably high up has a daughter by that name? And favour is being curried?
Interesting that all the major ones are female. Highup execs in the relevant companies think PA and think female? Or a mass of market research showing that's preferable to consumers for some reason?
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Was this his Adrian Heath/ Mark Robbins (delete according to Everton or Man U allegiance) moment?
Yep - or (for me) the Poulter Ryder Cup putt on the Saturday at Medinah 2012.
Not 'wot done it' but 'wot made wot followed possible'.
Do think after Johnson there may be a market for honest and uncharismatic. And to add, willing to graft rather than grift.
P.s. I think I may have come up with a strap line there. Labour, you’re welcome - gratis from me!
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Was this his Adrian Heath/ Mark Robbins (delete according to Everton or Man U allegiance) moment?
Yep - or (for me) the Poulter Ryder Cup putt on the Saturday at Medinah 2012.
Not 'wot done it' but 'wot made wot followed possible'.
And if 'wot followed' turns out to be a fifth consecutive general election returning a Tory PM then what would that signify?
If the Tories win a fifth election in a row that would be unprecedented for any party since the Duke of Wellington in 1830 by my reckoning, is that right?
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
But both arguments assume that Johnson will do what's best for NATO/Britain/Europe/the Tories - rather than what's best for Johnson. If he thinks he'll gain from shunting May off to NATO, then it will matter not a jot that he's putting a vulnerable seat up in a by-election, or putting a square peg in a round hole.
That's a very good reason for Boris to want rid of her. Wasn't that a scene in Borgen or similar, about sending unwanted politicians to the EU. Shunting them off to NATO seems a reasonable alternative.
But why would the rest of NATO play along? Why would they agree to her candidacy?
I have no idea how the process for NATO SecGen works, although I wouldn't be surprised if it's one of those posts that goes on Buggins' turn: quite a few of the military side posts do, IIRC.
Whatever people think of Galloway he did very well here. The result was poor for the two main parties. The PB labour lot claiming it’s a stunning result are off their heads. They scraped home and only just. Had the election been last week I suspect they’d have lost. They clearly threw everything at it this last week.
Labour won and the party led by the disingenuous racist fat fornicator lost. That's the main takeaway and it's good news.
Agreed. And they didn’t just lose, they came third.
No, the Tories came second.
I’m sure Galloway was third.
"the party led by the racist fat fornicator" is the Tories surely.
Boris isn't racist. He's certainly the others.
The Workers Party ticks all three boxes.
If Johnson is not racist, why does he refer to black people as "piccanninies" with "watermelon" smiles? Why did he write as follows?
"If Blair's so good at running the Congo, let him stay there (...) It is said that the Queen has come to love the Commonwealth, partly because it supplies her with regular cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies; and one can imagine that Blair, twice victor abroad but enmired at home, is similarly seduced by foreign politeness. They say he is shortly off to the Congo. No doubt the AK47s will fall silent, and the pangas will stop their hacking of human flesh, and the tribal warriors will all break out in watermelon smiles to see the big white chief touch down in his big white British taxpayer-funded bird."
Much later the Spectator, sneering at those who called him racist, said he was actually being "anti-imperialist".
Many readers of the Daily Telegraph and of the Spectator too - as Johnson must have been keenly aware - would have recalled another speech in which the racist word "piccaninnies" was used, there qualified with the adjective "wide-grinning". Of course he is a racist. No fault in anybody else can excuse that.
Presumably a racist who appoints minority ethnic people to be Home Secretary, Health Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer? Can you divorce colourful writing about colonialism from how a person behaves? I don't believe Johnson is racist - if its female he'd try to shag it, if its male he'll try to screw it over... Equal opportunities...
Is it not possible to treat individuals you know personally in a non racist way, but still be willing to use racist dog whistles and jokes to win votes?
This government, and therefore the PM, do deserve significant and real credit for the racial diversity in their cabinet, but equally that does not put them beyond reproach and scrutiny on the subject.
You have an article written 20 years ago by a journalist with a flair for using “colourful” language to cut through with the imagery that he wants
You have a PM who’s appointments to the Cabinet suggest skin colour simply isn’t a factor in appointments vs the usual considerations (loyalty, competence, party balance etc).
I would argue the second is more indicative of what the PM believes. Remember the old saying: pay attention to what someone does, not what they say
Nice win since I threw a few hopeful quid on Lab late in the day at the silly looking 7. But this in no way burnishes my superforecaster credentials. It was all hope rather than expectation.
Kudos in this case to others. Those who actually called the result. The likes of @HYUFD and @OnlyLivingBoy and @apologiesforomissions. Also @Cookie with his 20/1 tip on low Con vote share. And - although he got the result wrong - @AndyJS who was right about a strong showing from Gruesome Gurning George.
Have you forgotten the bloke who told you there was no equivalent of the Ben Houchen bandwagon effect in Batley ?
Sympathy with anyone who had the confidence to back Labour early enough on the miserable odds of 6/4 I got. A top-up on the day did improve things a bit - one of these days I'll get the timing right.....
Narrative matters. Objectively a narrow hold is not stunning in a historical sense, but in the context of recent months and the Galloway impact it is a very positive result for Labour, especially when many thought it lost and many nominally on his side hoped it was lost.
Gives a chance for a refresh, to talk of winning for a change - even if that should have been expected it very much wasnt for much of it, so it matters.
Yes completely agree. It is statistically not a good result for Labour - their worst ever vote share in B&S, following their worst in C&A following their worst in Hartlepool, but narrative wise it does mean something and I think that outweighs the underlying metrics
What he needs to do is to arrange a steady supply of photo opportunities in the area for the PM - and other Cabinet ministers - and then ensure that they fly up from London on the Flag Plane, which can be charged an appropriately eye-wateringly steep landing fee for an unscheduled flight.
Johnson has three Flag Planes now. 1 x A330, 2 x A321LR
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
I think I've been highlighting this for the past 3 weeks. According to the twins wages are definitely rising - the teenagers in Bowness Co-op and Tesco have / are moving elsewhere as wages elsewhere are now higher than those chains national payscales.
I was in Bowness Tesco a lot over the past week. Worst Tesco ever.
I know you don't have much cash at the moment - but just use Booths.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
But both arguments assume that Johnson will do what's best for NATO/Britain/Europe/the Tories - rather than what's best for Johnson. If he thinks he'll gain from shunting May off to NATO, then it will matter not a jot that he's putting a vulnerable seat up in a by-election, or putting a square peg in a round hole.
That's a very good reason for Boris to want rid of her. Wasn't that a scene in Borgen or similar, about sending unwanted politicians to the EU. Shunting them off to NATO seems a reasonable alternative.
But why would the rest of NATO play along? Why would they agree to her candidacy?
Plus points for the rest of NATO.
1. Prestige of a former UK PM taking the role. I think the last British Secretary General was George Robinson (or was it Robertson?), one of the Blair-era defence secretaries. 2. She'd be seen as a realist from the European point of view of her Brexit experience. Far superior for that reason, in their view, then any British candidate with better links to Johnson.
Well if they want the prestige, then they're welcome to her as far as I'm concerned. A terrible appointment, but let it be their terrible appointment.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
Its not a terrible idea - but unfortunately she comes across as weak, given what happened to her over Brexit. There are better options.
But both arguments assume that Johnson will do what's best for NATO/Britain/Europe/the Tories - rather than what's best for Johnson. If he thinks he'll gain from shunting May off to NATO, then it will matter not a jot that he's putting a vulnerable seat up in a by-election, or putting a square peg in a round hole.
I don't think giving the Lib Dems the feeling of real momentum in the south with a (Going by Chesham) probable win in Maidenhead would do him any favours at all as suddenly a whole bunch of home counties Tory backbenchers become worried about their seats. But he probably won't think that far ahead.
Boris won't think ahead and probably still wants potential awkward squad members removed.
Looking back, until May got to the Tory Front Bench it wasn't an especially safe seat, vis a vis the LD's. Majorities well under 10k. It was only after she got to public prominence that her vote went up a lot.
Matt's cartoon today is very good - but unusually makes me want to cry rather than laugh:
We've got an apartment booked in Spain for the two week October half term to go see the family. Haven't booked flights and really not sure it'll happen. On the plus side having moved north of the wall in February it still feels like we're on holiday, so staying at home and going exploring isn't a hardship.
What he needs to do is to arrange a steady supply of photo opportunities in the area for the PM - and other Cabinet ministers - and then ensure that they fly up from London on the Flag Plane, which can be charged an appropriately eye-wateringly steep landing fee for an unscheduled flight.
Johnson has three Flag Planes now. 1 x A330, 2 x A321LR
Cheers! I'd lost count at two, but I think having more than one of them arrive into Teesside on the same day would be a bit obvious.
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Was this his Adrian Heath/ Mark Robbins (delete according to Everton or Man U allegiance) moment?
Yep - or (for me) the Poulter Ryder Cup putt on the Saturday at Medinah 2012.
Not 'wot done it' but 'wot made wot followed possible'.
Do think after Johnson there may be a market for honest and uncharismatic. And to add, willing to graft rather than grift.
We had that with May, and it doesn't work without something else backing it up.
Not saying that Starmer won't have that, but no evidence yet without policies and 'vision'
At least he now has another 12 months or so without a summer of discontent, although it will rumble under the surface.
Nice win since I threw a few hopeful quid on Lab late in the day at the silly looking 7. But this in no way burnishes my superforecaster credentials. It was all hope rather than expectation.
Kudos in this case to others. Those who actually called the result. The likes of @HYUFD and @OnlyLivingBoy and @apologiesforomissions. Also @Cookie with his 20/1 tip on low Con vote share. And - although he got the result wrong - @AndyJS who was right about a strong showing from Gruesome Gurning George.
Have you forgotten the bloke who told you there was no equivalent of the Ben Houchen bandwagon effect in Batley ?
I never forget you, Richard. But did you say both that (which is a soft, under-the-counter thing) plus the hard, visible thing that Labour were winning this? If you did, fair play and hats off and smug city and all the rest of it.
It looks to me that the Conservatives have a ceiling of under 40% in Batley & Spen.
Now you might mention the 12.2% who voted for the Heavy Wollens in 2019.
But are the people who voted for a no hope protest party in a general election really going to switch to a governing party in a byelection ?
Well the BXP voters in Hartlepool did you might say.
But those Hartlepool BXP voters were voting for the party they thought could win in 2019 whereas the Heavy Wollen voters were deliberately making a protest vote during a general election.
I think that Labour should be favourites.
Interesting analysis.... I also note that the Yorkshire Party got 9% in the Mayoral elections...not sure if their B&S candidate is up to much but there is more volatility in the vote in my opinion which makes it tighter than many suggest. Labour as favourites is perhaps too generous but I wouldnt stake much on a Tory gain
I think we should start from the premise that Labour are favourites unless a convincing explanation is given to the contrary.
And I've not seen anything to convince me that the Conservatives should be favourites.
Did you call Hartlepool right, Ricardo?
Not being funny, just curious and I can't recall if you did.
I didn't make a call on Hartlepool.
I was certain that BXP had taken more votes from the Conservatives than Labour in 2019 but whether that was enough to stop the Conservatives from winning I didn't know.
I did pay attention to the PBers with local knowledge who were very vocal that the Conservatives would win and they were correct.
Now I don't see anyone giving a convincing explanation as to why the Conservatives should be favourites in Batley.
So that leaves me with my default assumption that Labour should be favourites.
Why would May, who has atrocious people skills, be any more successful as secretary-general of NATO, which is a strained alliance that needs exceptional leadership and engagement to repivot and reinvigorate itself in the years to come?
I wouldn't support her candidacy.
The qualities or otherwise of the SecGen are largely irrelevant as NATO exists to enable US strategic doctrine. The real leadership is and always will be in the Pentagon. The NATO CinC (SACEUR) is always American and the matter is not open to question.
"The officeholder is an international diplomat responsible for coordinating the workings of the alliance, leading NATO's international staff, chairing the meetings of the North Atlantic Council and most major committees of the alliance, with the notable exception of the NATO Military Committee, as well as acting as NATO's spokesperson."
Whatever people think of Galloway he did very well here. The result was poor for the two main parties. The PB labour lot claiming it’s a stunning result are off their heads. They scraped home and only just. Had the election been last week I suspect they’d have lost. They clearly threw everything at it this last week.
Labour won and the party led by the disingenuous racist fat fornicator lost. That's the main takeaway and it's good news.
Agreed. And they didn’t just lose, they came third.
No, the Tories came second.
I’m sure Galloway was third.
"the party led by the racist fat fornicator" is the Tories surely.
Boris isn't racist. He's certainly the others.
The Workers Party ticks all three boxes.
If Johnson is not racist, why does he refer to black people as "piccanninies" with "watermelon" smiles? Why did he write as follows?
"If Blair's so good at running the Congo, let him stay there (...) It is said that the Queen has come to love the Commonwealth, partly because it supplies her with regular cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies; and one can imagine that Blair, twice victor abroad but enmired at home, is similarly seduced by foreign politeness. They say he is shortly off to the Congo. No doubt the AK47s will fall silent, and the pangas will stop their hacking of human flesh, and the tribal warriors will all break out in watermelon smiles to see the big white chief touch down in his big white British taxpayer-funded bird."
Much later the Spectator, sneering at those who called him racist, said he was actually being "anti-imperialist".
Many readers of the Daily Telegraph and of the Spectator too - as Johnson must have been keenly aware - would have recalled another speech in which the racist word "piccaninnies" was used, there qualified with the adjective "wide-grinning". Of course he is a racist. No fault in anybody else can excuse that.
Presumably a racist who appoints minority ethnic people to be Home Secretary, Health Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer? Can you divorce colourful writing about colonialism from how a person behaves? I don't believe Johnson is racist - if its female he'd try to shag it, if its male he'll try to screw it over... Equal opportunities...
Is it not possible to treat individuals you know personally in a non racist way, but still be willing to use racist dog whistles and jokes to win votes?
This government, and therefore the PM, do deserve significant and real credit for the racial diversity in their cabinet, but equally that does not put them beyond reproach and scrutiny on the subject.
You have an article written 20 years ago by a journalist with a flair for using “colourful” language to cut through with the imagery that he wants
You have a PM who’s appointments to the Cabinet suggest skin colour simply isn’t a factor in appointments vs the usual considerations (loyalty, competence, party balance etc).
I would argue the second is more indicative of what the PM believes. Remember the old saying: pay attention to what someone does, not what they say
Yes, before we criticise someone for being racist, let's remember the times when they weren't racist.
It's like my old pal, Dr Shipman. He comes in for a lot of stick from those in this country who always want to do people down but, when not killing patients, he was actually an outstanding physician with a very pleasant bedside manner.
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Was this his Adrian Heath/ Mark Robbins (delete according to Everton or Man U allegiance) moment?
Yep - or (for me) the Poulter Ryder Cup putt on the Saturday at Medinah 2012.
Not 'wot done it' but 'wot made wot followed possible'.
And if 'wot followed' turns out to be a fifth consecutive general election returning a Tory PM then what would that signify?
If the Tories win a fifth election in a row that would be unprecedented for any party since the Duke of Wellington in 1830 by my reckoning, is that right?
Isn't that a bit of a statistical oddity though, brought about by an unprecedented ousting of Tory leaders in chaotic times? (A chaos largely brought about by Boris.)
Whatever people think of Galloway he did very well here. The result was poor for the two main parties. The PB labour lot claiming it’s a stunning result are off their heads. They scraped home and only just. Had the election been last week I suspect they’d have lost. They clearly threw everything at it this last week.
Labour won and the party led by the disingenuous racist fat fornicator lost. That's the main takeaway and it's good news.
Agreed. And they didn’t just lose, they came third.
No, the Tories came second.
I’m sure Galloway was third.
"the party led by the racist fat fornicator" is the Tories surely.
Boris isn't racist. He's certainly the others.
The Workers Party ticks all three boxes.
If Johnson is not racist, why does he refer to black people as "piccanninies" with "watermelon" smiles? Why did he write as follows?
"If Blair's so good at running the Congo, let him stay there (...) It is said that the Queen has come to love the Commonwealth, partly because it supplies her with regular cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies; and one can imagine that Blair, twice victor abroad but enmired at home, is similarly seduced by foreign politeness. They say he is shortly off to the Congo. No doubt the AK47s will fall silent, and the pangas will stop their hacking of human flesh, and the tribal warriors will all break out in watermelon smiles to see the big white chief touch down in his big white British taxpayer-funded bird."
Much later the Spectator, sneering at those who called him racist, said he was actually being "anti-imperialist".
Many readers of the Daily Telegraph and of the Spectator too - as Johnson must have been keenly aware - would have recalled another speech in which the racist word "piccaninnies" was used, there qualified with the adjective "wide-grinning". Of course he is a racist. No fault in anybody else can excuse that.
Presumably a racist who appoints minority ethnic people to be Home Secretary, Health Minister and Chancellor of the Exchequer? Can you divorce colourful writing about colonialism from how a person behaves? I don't believe Johnson is racist - if its female he'd try to shag it, if its male he'll try to screw it over... Equal opportunities...
Is it not possible to treat individuals you know personally in a non racist way, but still be willing to use racist dog whistles and jokes to win votes?
This government, and therefore the PM, do deserve significant and real credit for the racial diversity in their cabinet, but equally that does not put them beyond reproach and scrutiny on the subject.
You have an article written 20 years ago by a journalist with a flair for using “colourful” language to cut through with the imagery that he wants
You have a PM who’s appointments to the Cabinet suggest skin colour simply isn’t a factor in appointments vs the usual considerations (loyalty, competence, party balance etc).
I would argue the second is more indicative of what the PM believes. Remember the old saying: pay attention to what someone does, not what they say
Have there ever been so many ethnic minorities in ministerial roles?
Just in the Cabinet, we have Sunak, Javid, Patel, Sharma, Kwarteng - five of 23. Plus the excellent Kemi Badenoch in the Equalities role.
Mucking about on Betfair after the polls closed cost me about £300 🙈 Should have just gone to bed
Looks like the poll, and @NickPalmer, vastly undercooked the GG vote.
Yes, it did and I did, and there's an interesting possible reason which, to be fair Mr Ed pointed out in a private exchange. There is a linguistic problem in canvassing/polling voters whose first language isn't English. By chance most of the voters who I phone-canvassed didn't have that issue, but where it arose we exchanged polite mumbles and I wasn't sure what I'd been told. It's much easier on the doorstep, but Survation polls nowdays are I think phone polls.
It's possible, as another_richard has suggested, that a chunk of the Galloway vote was ex-Heavy Woollen, which would fit with the Muslim vote actually being divided between Galloway and Labour, as I'd heard. But actual sightings of non-Muslim voters saying they were voting Galloway have been almost non-existent. So I think we need to concede that the Muslim vote probably did go heavily for Galloway.
A large Muslim vote from Labour AND a large islamophobic vote from the Woollens? - that would be quite a coalition George put together if so. I'm dubious. I'd think it was mainly the former. Take out GG - oh please - and Labour have a much bigger win here. In fact the more I think about this from a structural GE perspective the better a result for Labour it looks. Cons still clear favourites but Lab right back in the game.
Its not that strange a coalition kinabalu, its classic horseshoe politics.
Its worth noting that a large portion of the none-of-the-above vote went 2010 to 2015 directly from the Liberal Democrats to UKIP.
Politics makes strange bedfellows. The Islamists and the Woolens have more in common with each other than they do with either main party and Galloway as a political outsider appeals to both.
If he got a big chunk of Woollens vote it would make the result slightly less disappointing for the Cons. But I really doubt that he did.
I wonder if Galloway provoked his own backlash. Galloway is such an odious figure, Leadbeater seems an alright sort and Starmer is not Corbyn. Surely some Tories would have voted for Leadbeater to avoid risking Galloway winning. It seems even more likely to me, when I remember a lot of people don't follow the ins and outs of politics, that some Tories might well have thought 'I hate George Galloway, and this seat is Labour so I will vote Labour to keep him out.'
Not to take away from this victory, because Labour need Con to Lab switchers to win at GE. That I think they have done it (albeit in favourable circumstances) is encouraging.
Yes, could have been some of that. Also maybe some pure personal vote for Kim. It is quite a poignant (in a good way) thing to see Jo's sister now representing her seat. If I were a Con supporter I'd be stressing these factors.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Was this his Adrian Heath/ Mark Robbins (delete according to Everton or Man U allegiance) moment?
Yep - or (for me) the Poulter Ryder Cup putt on the Saturday at Medinah 2012.
Not 'wot done it' but 'wot made wot followed possible'.
And if 'wot followed' turns out to be a fifth consecutive general election returning a Tory PM then what would that signify?
If the Tories win a fifth election in a row that would be unprecedented for any party since the Duke of Wellington in 1830 by my reckoning, is that right?
If they won in 2023 it would be after 13 years in power, so basically would match Major's re election in 1992 13 years after the Tories came to office in 1979.
The Tories have also only won a majority in 2 out of the last 4 elections, the Tories had won a majority 3 times in a row pre 1992 and the expectation was Kinnock would force a hung parliament at least
We have some Dutch friends with a daughter called Siri, I don't believe this has been a problem for them - as noted in the article, their pronunciation is more 'see-ree'. Cortana and Bixby are presumably rare enough (and invoked rarely enough, particularly by the kids) to not be a problem!
Slow news day at the BBC?
Or someone reasonably high up has a daughter by that name? And favour is being curried?
I'm sure this is an issue for at least some Alexas, but I am not sure what can be done about that.
Cortana is an interesting one, given that I don't believe it was a name at all before 2001's Halo, where it was the name of a fictional assistant.
Which means that Cortanas born between 2001 and 2014) were named after the fictional assistant, and their parents can't really complain when Microsoft made it a real assistant.
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
I think I've been highlighting this for the past 3 weeks. According to the twins wages are definitely rising - the teenagers in Bowness Co-op and Tesco have / are moving elsewhere as wages elsewhere are now higher than those chains national payscales.
I was in Bowness Tesco a lot over the past week. Worst Tesco ever.
I know you don't have much cash at the moment - but just use Booths.
Great range of craft beers
Great range of everything. Booths is paradise.
The weirdest thing about Booths is that Morrisons closed in Northallerton expecting Booths to want the site, and then discovered that they didn't so Morrisons reopened.
Booths is the sole reason we will hope into the car and go to Ripon (and yes that is a 50 mile round trip to go to a supermarket).
What I find interesting is the combination of the last two byelection results. Tory strategists will be scratching their heads this morning trying to work out what it means for the next general election.
I think even more interesting is the combination of the locals and the three by-elections. If that was repeated at a general election, everybody would remember Paddy Ashdown's comment about 2010 - "the people have spoken, and we've no idea what they've said".
My favourite was Gyles Brandreth on losing Chester (although he may have been re-quoting someone else) - "The people have spoken; the bastards"
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
Although there was an interesting interview on Today this morning with a restauranteur who was struggling to find staff. Usually sort of stuff - I advertised, great wage, only got one applicant etc etc.
It wasn’t until the end that they revealed it was in Philadelphia.
When I was looking at the Maidenhead figures I noticed that a chap called Bobby Smith, candidate for the Give Me Back My Elmo party. got 3 votes in 2017, out of a total of 58,239 cast in the constituency. Is this a record low?
Nice win since I threw a few hopeful quid on Lab late in the day at the silly looking 7. But this in no way burnishes my superforecaster credentials. It was all hope rather than expectation.
Kudos in this case to others. Those who actually called the result. The likes of @HYUFD and @OnlyLivingBoy and @apologiesforomissions. Also @Cookie with his 20/1 tip on low Con vote share. And - although he got the result wrong - @AndyJS who was right about a strong showing from Gruesome Gurning George.
Have you forgotten the bloke who told you there was no equivalent of the Ben Houchen bandwagon effect in Batley ?
There may not be a Ben Houchen bandwagon on Teesside for long either. Amazing as it might be, Ben Houchen International is not viable as an airport. In the past there were flights to London and to sunspots and not enough bums on seats so the flights were withdrawn.
Its now publicly owned, it continues to make huge losses, the announced flights already being cancelled before they have even got going and the boy has had to tip another £10m of public money into the black hole.
He was elected in 2016 on two pledges - bring back Teesside International Airport, and protect the parmo from the EU. The airport needs to actually be a going concern though, and like every other small regional airport it doesn't make sense for the airlines to serve it.
Another reason for the third runway at Heathrow - right now the landing slots at LHR change hands for tens of millions, so smaller, regional carriers are shut out in favour of long haul carriers with large aircraft.
We should have built that a decade ago. However I would now advise caution - lets see what travel patterns look like post-Covid first. It would be classic British planning stupidity to not build what obviously needed building for decades and then build it late as a white elephant.
Air travel isn’t going away though, and even if LHR goes down from 99% to 90% aircraft capacity they still need that third runway. A foggy day in the winter still sees flights cancelled and planes scattered all over England, as LVPs can’t cope with the 2.5nm approach spacing that’s pretty much unique to the field they usually push the limits of flying planes close together, in a way that’s not possible when they can’t physically see them.
That chap from Romford has been charged with 'common assault', following the 'attack' on Prof. Whitty.
Good. No matter what we think of people, they’re just doing their job in a once-in-a-lifetime situation. No-one deserves to be assaulted on the street for doing their job.
Excellent result for Starmer, no gettting around it. He would have been in very serious trouble if he had lost but a win is a win and getting the win with Galloway over 8k is impressive.
The Tories have fallen back quite a bit. Still by no means the worst position for a mid term 4th term government but they are well off their peak. I would not be at all surprised to see polling with Labour level very soon.
This is essentially what I think. Peak Tory is passed and thanks to Hancock, the Tories have re-created something resembling the Cummings narrative, which damaged them at least in the short term previously.
I think we'll see polling parity again by the end of this year, Starmer though needs to do something about those approval ratings (although to be fair Johnson's are also dropping, so possible he is leading on that again at some point).
I think Starmer has got to go big now on a proper reshuffle and to kick people out if they don't want to win. He's now got control of the party again, he really needs to show the public he's changing it. Only then, will people start to see Labour as an alternative party of Government.
I thought peak Johnson had passed this time last year. I hope you are correct, but we are still in strange times.
Glad you're still posting Pete and hope you are well.
When I was looking at the Maidenhead figures I noticed that a chap called Bobby Smith, candidate for the Give Me Back My Elmo party. got 3 votes in 2017, out of a total of 58,239 cast in the constituency. Is this a record low?
We need to be careful in transferring 2019 votes to the by-election result. It is tempting to assign en bloc Muslim votes to Galloway, or Woollen votes, but that is so much numerology without supporting evidence.
What we forget is the large drop in turnout. The stay-at-home party scored 15,000 votes yesterday. That's more than the winning Labour candidate.
If we re-calibrate yesterday's result using the 2019 turnout, we get:- Abstain 15,154 28% Labour 13,296 25% Tory 12,973 24% GG-WP 8,264 15%
In the 2019 general election, we saw:- Labour 22,594 43% Tory 19,069 36% Woollen 6,432 12%
So it is quite possible that disaffected voters sat at home rather than transferring their alliegance to any party.
There’s hospitality vacancies all over the Lake District. Same as in Haulage. What the consequences are of a severe labour shortage, I don’t know.
I think @Philip_Thompson is right that it isn’t entirely down to Brexit but it does likely plays a part.
Although there was an interesting interview on Today this morning with a restauranteur who was struggling to find staff. Usually sort of stuff - I advertised, great wage, only got one applicant etc etc.
It wasn’t until the end that they revealed it was in Philadelphia.
There seems a real shortage of experienced staff in Edinburgh in such establishments. The number of establishments advertising for front of house, chefs etc is remarkable. A couple of years ago, pre Covid most the staff in these establishments were foreign, typically EU students. Now you see more Scots, even if they seem a bit gormless at times. Hopefully they will get better with training and experience.
I think May would be a perfectly good leader of NATO tbh.
Why?
On the plus side: It gets her out of the Commons.
Why don't you want her in the Commons? Presumably because her devotion to Boris falls a little short of your own.
Because she is a nasty, horrid individual who think it is appropriate to send vans to areas of minorities telling people to "GO HOME", was an atrocious Home Secretary that led to the Windrush scandal, was a disastrous Prime Minister, and as a backbencher is a leading NIMBY wanting to prevent new housing being built. She represents the very worst characteristics of the Tory Party. If she never becomes a Minister again it will be too soon and if she's never going to be a Minister again then she is 'bed blocking' the seat from fresh talent that could be good in the future unlike her.
Boris lost my support with his extension of lockdown last month and I've been supporting since last year Tory rebels like Steve Baker who have been challenging the party on lockdown restrictions.
Comments
The whole contractor vs employee argument isn’t going away, in a number of sectors. The long-term solution involves phasing out the concept of employer NI - it is simply a tax on jobs.
But I think on balance the GG effect was against Labour (for the obvious reason) and so this result is genuinely great news for the party and for Starmer. He now has a year to define what he's about.
Amusingly they wanted him to work more hours than he wanted to commit to. That lasted 2 shifts during which he has formed a friendship with a young lady who works there.
For some reason he now seems open to working more days
As @Philip_Thompson points out, the end result will be wages going up for working antisocial hours. Which is a good thing.
Remember that for years the Tories stated they wouldn't increase VAT, Income tax and Employee NI so ended up increasing Employer NI as that was the only game left in town that could be increased.
https://twitter.com/TedJeory/status/1410891217768955908
- Employee people at the market rate, rather than internal job banding. For social reason you can't pay an employee more than their manager, apparently. But paying a contractor x times more works...
- As you say, head count. Though that is largely bullshit, of course. Since the cost of employing contractors long term (year+) ....
- Government was fairly unique in that they were allowing swapping PAYE to contracting in the same job. This happened briefly in the private sector, but was stamped out a long while back. If you are in private employment, look in your contract. There will, almost certainly, be a clause in their preventing you being re-employed in your job as a contractor.
This is the issues with truck drivers. Pay is not the issue - there aren't enough drivers. Until more people join the pool of qualified drivers there is no pay solution to stop the nationwide problem.
"Elections are bruising and it takes bravery to stand. Thank you to
@Stephenson_Ryan
for fighting the campaign on the issues and not pandering to divisions. We may disagree on a lot but he’s a good man and has more to give."
In case it's not obvious - this is Jo Cox's husband
Of course it was a Labour hold, and should have been. But those PB Tories spinning that it wasn't a failure for the Tories are being disingenuous. It wasn't just the bookies who were confident the Tories would win - it was CCHQ as well. The fact that they couldn't pull it off even with Galloway splitting the vote is telling.
Finally, if I were a Tory I'd be worried that it wasn't Hancock himself that made the difference. It was Johnson's failure to sack him, followed by him sort of implying that he had sacked him really. The PM is weak, weak, weak.
A real one in the eye for the right wing press, especially the Express.
Lib Dems won Cobham last night on a big swing.
Exactly why Labour won doesn’t need to be analysed this morning, we already had header after header for all the reasons printed here BEFORE the Polling
Its now publicly owned, it continues to make huge losses, the announced flights already being cancelled before they have even got going and the boy has had to tip another £10m of public money into the black hole.
He was elected in 2016 on two pledges - bring back Teesside International Airport, and protect the parmo from the EU. The airport needs to actually be a going concern though, and like every other small regional airport it doesn't make sense for the airlines to serve it.
But why would the rest of NATO play along? Why would they agree to her candidacy?
I have a couple of old squadronmates on the 747 fleet. Both are on furlough; one is detailing cars and the other is cutting lawns. Neither expects to fly again. I chopped one of them from his Hawk course many years ago and I have no idea how or why he ever had any job in aviation.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-57680173
We have some Dutch friends with a daughter called Siri, I don't believe this has been a problem for them - as noted in the article, their pronunciation is more 'see-ree'. Cortana and Bixby are presumably rare enough (and invoked rarely enough, particularly by the kids) to not be a problem!
Slow news day at the BBC?
May appointed head of NATO 3/1
May appointed & thermonuclear war in next 12 months 4/1
(Although I know they might be deemed contingent events)
Not 'wot done it' but 'wot made wot followed possible'.
Also, Conservative votes have gone backward in B&S in the last two elections.
1. Prestige of a former UK PM taking the role. I think the last British Secretary General was George Robinson (or was it Robertson?), one of the Blair-era defence secretaries.
2. She'd be seen as a realist from the European point of view of her Brexit experience. Far superior for that reason, in their view, then any British candidate with better links to Johnson.
Sadly the 747 fleet has been a victim of the pandemic, and as you say there will be little appetite to retrain the older pilots on expensive contracts for the 777/787 fleets. AIUI the long-standing senior Captains were on close to £200k.
However he would have to get a hung parliament and become PM after that election to then see off a potential challenge from Burnham if as likely he has returned to the Commons by then
If the Tories win a fifth election in a row that would be unprecedented for any party since the Duke of Wellington in 1830 by my reckoning, is that right?
You have a PM who’s appointments to the Cabinet suggest skin colour simply isn’t a factor in appointments vs the usual considerations (loyalty, competence, party balance etc).
I would argue the second is more indicative of what the PM believes. Remember the old saying: pay attention to what someone does, not what they say
Found the clip I was thinking about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F7yiv09ldts
It was only after she got to public prominence that her vote went up a lot.
Not saying that Starmer won't have that, but no evidence yet without policies and 'vision'
At least he now has another 12 months or so without a summer of discontent, although it will rumble under the surface.
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_50094.htm
I can't think of a person less well suited to that than Theresa May.
It's like my old pal, Dr Shipman. He comes in for a lot of stick from those in this country who always want to do people down but, when not killing patients, he was actually an outstanding physician with a very pleasant bedside manner.
Just in the Cabinet, we have Sunak, Javid, Patel, Sharma, Kwarteng - five of 23. Plus the excellent Kemi Badenoch in the Equalities role.
The Tories have also only won a majority in 2 out of the last 4 elections, the Tories had won a majority 3 times in a row pre 1992 and the expectation was Kinnock would force a hung parliament at least
Their Christmas hampers are also excellent.
Cortana is an interesting one, given that I don't believe it was a name at all before 2001's Halo, where it was the name of a fictional assistant.
Which means that Cortanas born between 2001 and 2014) were named after the fictional assistant, and their parents can't really complain when Microsoft made it a real assistant.
Booths is the sole reason we will hope into the car and go to Ripon (and yes that is a 50 mile round trip to go to a supermarket).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Tuck
It wasn’t until the end that they revealed it was in Philadelphia.
Difficult to think of anywhere outside inner London where that would be true.
Is this a record low?
LVPs can’t cope with the 2.5nm approach spacing that’s pretty much unique to the fieldthey usually push the limits of flying planes close together, in a way that’s not possible when they can’t physically see them.What we forget is the large drop in turnout. The stay-at-home party scored 15,000 votes yesterday. That's more than the winning Labour candidate.
If we re-calibrate yesterday's result using the 2019 turnout, we get:-
Abstain 15,154 28%
Labour 13,296 25%
Tory 12,973 24%
GG-WP 8,264 15%
In the 2019 general election, we saw:-
Labour 22,594 43%
Tory 19,069 36%
Woollen 6,432 12%
So it is quite possible that disaffected voters sat at home rather than transferring their alliegance to any party.
Boris lost my support with his extension of lockdown last month and I've been supporting since last year Tory rebels like Steve Baker who have been challenging the party on lockdown restrictions.