SPD and Grune and Linke still only gets to 48% though, SPD and Grune and FDP does get to 50%
I think this is an outlier for die Linke but I would be surprised if they poll less than 6% and get less than 3 constituency seats in East Berlin. I would be surprised if they got any constituency elsewhere though (like Leipzig/Dresden etc)
Assuming that FW and Sonstige(others) are not in the final shareout as they are below 5%, then 48 out of 90 will definitely be above 50%, therefore a majority.
I agree about the Linke 8% being an outlier (the other poll on the same day showed them still at 6). But as Gary and Davey say, the sPD is likely to have a choice - Greens plus FDP or Linke. I think Scholz would prefer the FDP, though that might lose some voters on the left. Probably we won't know at once as Scholz will trade off one against the other in negotiations.
On a lighter note, this is what the Greens in Germany want for a sleeper train network. It gets my vote!
Mine too. Some impossibly romantic journeys there. London to Venice. London to Barcelona. London to Naples. Wake up looking at Capri!
Edinburgh to Athens would be the ultimate but they've gotta get up and cross stations in London. Sorry about that
Yes, that's one reason why we need to build a direct link to HS2, so trains from Scotland/northern England can go direct to the continent. That said, I believe Paris suffers from the same issue (I could be wrong, I dare say the PB Train Experts will clarify).
You can certainly go from Calais to all points south without having to go via Paris - back in the day when the night trains had motorail attached, we used it to go all sort of places. And used Belgian, Dutch and German motorrail as well, all now sadly defunct, or almost so.
Sean will note that from the old Naples service (which AIR was DB from Düsseldorf) you never got a glimpse of Capri from the train, it being the other side of the town, and you woke up on the North Italian plains and then sat in the train until mid afternoon while it trundled its way down the peninsula.
The old sleeper services had the lowest priority on the network, would often be shunted unto sidings or left hanging about during the night while other trains went through, and the northern Italian ones deliberately went slow, otherwise you would arrive in the small hours.
Combining sleepers with high speed would indeed be an innovation, but when you think how far you could get on an HS train in six or seven hours, you only need it for the very longest (and hence least common) journeys like London to Seville and the like.
There would be a huge market for London to Vienna / Austrian Alps in the winter, just as there is a huge market for the French Alps Eurostar and the Caledonian Sleeper.
Pan-European services are a GREAT idea. The key is to make them luxurious and FUN.
We used to have such services and they were fun. The Wagon-Lits from Calais (later Paris) to Rome were a staple of my childhood. There was even the boat train from Victoria. It's how we travelled to Italy.
Then when the children were younger we regularly put the car on the train at Bruges and travel with the car overnight to Italy, with a lovely evening meal in the restaurant car. You could get off at Livorno and you were in Tuscany. Or go on to Rome. You could also do it via Germany.
The other option was to put the car on a train in Paris and go to Nice while taking a separate overnight couchette. But the last time I did that the service was abysmal.
If they reintroduce trains like this it would be great. Much more fun than having to drive through large parts of Europe. But I'll believe it when I see it. It will take significant investment and much better levels of service.
+1
(Although it was from Schaarbeek station near Brussels, not Bruges)
The alarming thing - for first time travellers on Belgian motorail anyhow - was that they often used to take the cars down on a separate train and sort and connect them up during the night. So you’d trundle out of Schaarbeek in the passenger carriage and see out of the window your own car sitting on another train in the siding.
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
It's not that long since the Royal Free in Hampstead had a line painted on the ground, inside which you were not allowed to use a mobile phone.
Thinking of you.
I have a contract to review. But simply cannot concentrate. And did not get home last night until 3 am so v tired as well. Have now consumed my body weight in coffee and am developing an all-consuming hatred for other people's noisy and annoying children.
Taken together, the end of the war in Afghanistan, the pivot against China, and the prioritization of the old Anglo alliances over the EU are all grand strategic moves. “When you make grand strategic moves,” the British official said, “you piss people off.”
The new military alliance to contain Beijing’s rise looks, then, at first glance, like a reassertion of the old order, but it is really one of the first murmurings of a new one taking its place.
Read a para. It seems a bit starting-from-here and constructing a 20-20 narrative. Is this true:
The basics are these: In 2016, Australia struck a deal with France to buy a fleet of diesel-powered submarines, rejecting an Anglo-American alternative for nuclear-powered vessels.
Were they offered such an alternative, or is this embroidery with fairy-stories?
I suspect in 2016 the nuclear powered option simply wasn't available.
Edit - the 2016 bidders where France, Germany and Japan. Nuclear clearly wasn't an option as Australia went for the Diesel version of France's Diesel / Nuclear submarine design
SPD and Grune and Linke still only gets to 48% though, SPD and Grune and FDP does get to 50%
I think this is an outlier for die Linke but I would be surprised if they poll less than 6% and get less than 3 constituency seats in East Berlin. I would be surprised if they got any constituency elsewhere though (like Leipzig/Dresden etc)
Assuming that FW and Sonstige(others) are not in the final shareout as they are below 5%, then 48 out of 90 will definitely be above 50%, therefore a majority.
I agree about the Linke 8% being an outlier (the other poll on the same day showed them still at 6). But as Gary and Davey say, the sPD is likely to have a choice - Greens plus FDP or Linke. I think Scholz would prefer the FDP, though that might lose some voters on the left. Probably we won't know at once as Scholz will trade off one against the other in negotiations.
On a lighter note, this is what the Greens in Germany want for a sleeper train network. It gets my vote!
Mine too. Some impossibly romantic journeys there. London to Venice. London to Barcelona. London to Naples. Wake up looking at Capri!
Edinburgh to Athens would be the ultimate but they've gotta get up and cross stations in London. Sorry about that
Yes, that's one reason why we need to build a direct link to HS2, so trains from Scotland/northern England can go direct to the continent. That said, I believe Paris suffers from the same issue (I could be wrong, I dare say the PB Train Experts will clarify).
You can certainly go from Calais to all points south without having to go via Paris - back in the day when the night trains had motorail attached, we used it to go all sort of places. And used Belgian, Dutch and German motorrail as well, all now sadly defunct, or almost so.
Sean will note that from the old Naples service (which AIR was DB from Düsseldorf) you never got a glimpse of Capri from the train, it being the other side of the town, and you woke up on the North Italian plains and then sat in the train until mid afternoon while it trundled its way down the peninsula.
The old sleeper services had the lowest priority on the network, would often be shunted unto sidings or left hanging about during the night while other trains went through, and the northern Italian ones deliberately went slow, otherwise you would arrive in the small hours.
Combining sleepers with high speed would indeed be an innovation, but when you think how far you could get on an HS train in six or seven hours, you only need it for the very longest (and hence least common) journeys like London to Seville and the like.
There would be a huge market for London to Vienna / Austrian Alps in the winter, just as there is a huge market for the French Alps Eurostar and the Caledonian Sleeper.
Pan-European services are a GREAT idea. The key is to make them luxurious and FUN.
We used to have such services and they were fun. The Wagon-Lits from Calais (later Paris) to Rome were a staple of my childhood. There was even the boat train from Victoria. It's how we travelled to Italy.
Then when the children were younger we regularly put the car on the train at Bruges and travel with the car overnight to Italy, with a lovely evening meal in the restaurant car. You could get off at Livorno and you were in Tuscany. Or go on to Rome. You could also do it via Germany.
The other option was to put the car on a train in Paris and go to Nice while taking a separate overnight couchette. But the last time I did that the service was abysmal.
If they reintroduce trains like this it would be great. Much more fun than having to drive through large parts of Europe. But I'll believe it when I see it. It will take significant investment and much better levels of service.
+1
(Although it was from Schaarbeek station near Brussels, not Bruges)
The alarming thing - for first time travellers on Belgian motorail anyhow - was that they often used to take the cars down on a separate train and sort and connect them up during the night. So you’d trundle out of Schaarbeek in the passenger carriage and see out of the window your own car sitting on another train in the siding.
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
What on earth has happened; been out for a vineyard visit with Eldest Son; wife’s birthday present, so not in loop. Not in Carlisle are you; we were in and out very quickly a couple of years ago.
A lot of people at that time (prior to Dave's conference speech) had a similar view of Cameron as many now have of Starmer. This is why, though I am not a Labour supporter, I would not write Starmer off
Isn't it more likely that Dave's bounce was mainly to do with it being the first time people had seen Brown up close as leader? Lots of people compare Starmer's progress at LotO with Cameron's, but don't usually consider that his opponent changed from being a charismatic, serial winner to a dour, uncharismatic drag on votes halfway through
Rupert Murdoch has signed up Piers Morgan and will launch a new TV network to challenge the BBC and GB News, in a move likely to further inflame Britain's culture wars
GB News will be down to a viewership of only those exiled from PB for causing England batting collapses.
I guess Fox has the advantage that they can reuse all their existing facilities, and probably some of their US programming.
But it does rather feel like two bald men fighting over a comb.
There is an argument for saying GB News' problem is not its target market - which is probably quite large - just the shambolic way it has been done.
In that way, it makes sense for Murdoch to come in plus he can cross-advertise / promote with his newspapers.
It has been shambolically launched - which is a surprise because I think both you and I know Paul Marshall, and he's usually a pretty shrewd operator.
But I'm not convinced there's that big a market for any network TV news channel in the UK. Simply, outside of waiting rooms in London offices (which are also going the way of the dodo), what is the combined viewership of TV news channels in the UK?
I mean, I guess Fox could effectively use the same reportage with a different set of commentators and make the numbers work, but video delivery is all VOD/YouTube/Instagram/TikTok these days, and viewership of even new channels in the US is cratering.
A curated set of commentators on on-line platforms with cross promotion could work. But I think the days of big centrally planned TV news channels are coming to an end.
Yes, although TBF, Marshall is not a media person and probably left it to others. I’m more surprised John Malone was involved and allowed it to develop in such a way.
I think on the potential audience, there are actually two types of ‘news’. The first is the traditional reporting type and, on that, there is no room for growth - the BBC has a natural advantage given its history, reputation etc although ITV ah as given it a shot (Sky News is just boring I find).
The second is, in reality, politicised entertainment. There I think there could be, especially with a Morgan at its helm. What you would want if you are News Corp is essentially a bunch of punchy, humorous, right-wing types taking the piss out of lefties. Is there a market for that? I think so. Maybe not on @pb though
SPD and Grune and Linke still only gets to 48% though, SPD and Grune and FDP does get to 50%
I think this is an outlier for die Linke but I would be surprised if they poll less than 6% and get less than 3 constituency seats in East Berlin. I would be surprised if they got any constituency elsewhere though (like Leipzig/Dresden etc)
Assuming that FW and Sonstige(others) are not in the final shareout as they are below 5%, then 48 out of 90 will definitely be above 50%, therefore a majority.
I agree about the Linke 8% being an outlier (the other poll on the same day showed them still at 6). But as Gary and Davey say, the sPD is likely to have a choice - Greens plus FDP or Linke. I think Scholz would prefer the FDP, though that might lose some voters on the left. Probably we won't know at once as Scholz will trade off one against the other in negotiations.
On a lighter note, this is what the Greens in Germany want for a sleeper train network. It gets my vote!
Mine too. Some impossibly romantic journeys there. London to Venice. London to Barcelona. London to Naples. Wake up looking at Capri!
Edinburgh to Athens would be the ultimate but they've gotta get up and cross stations in London. Sorry about that
Yes, that's one reason why we need to build a direct link to HS2, so trains from Scotland/northern England can go direct to the continent. That said, I believe Paris suffers from the same issue (I could be wrong, I dare say the PB Train Experts will clarify).
From booking trains from Edinburgh to Avignon for my late dad, he had to change stations in both London and Paris. Might be different now, but I suspect the two countries both suffer from their capital=galactic centre symdrome and can't imagine that anyone might not automatically want to pay homage.
Certainly an issue in nations with Primate Cities. I mean, Londoners and Parisians do have a point. They are both fantastic cities. But we really do need to consider rail bypasses for both.
I'm not sure it is actually necessary to destroy Camden as Leon fears - my friend who lives there showed me once a spur running off the main line (into Euston) at the Regents Park Road bridge that headed off east and entered a tangle of tracks and viaducts in the former gas-metery wastelands north of the British Library, so there's something right there, though needing engineering at the St Pancras end. Maybe someone knows why this wasn't picked up on.
One would certainly hope there are options. There is indeed a spaghetti nest of railway lines up there. You'd think something would be possible?
Leon's 'destroy Camden' comments are just repetition of the Camden NIMBYs who were against the scheme - led in the media by a certain Stanley Johnson (I'm sure I've heard of him before?)
Besides, as SeanT Leon knows all too well, Camden has been cut through many times; the Regent's Canal, the railway in the 1850s, roads and developments - and it still manages to thrive.
In reality, the scheme was canned because it was massively expensive for very little benefit. It as a nice-to-have, not a necessity. So it was the first thing axed on the scheme.
FPT but if I may please - what was the main problem? I mean, there's already a railway almost all the way!
Josias is being glib. The plans for Camden were horrendous. A decade of enormous demolition and building, all around the central Market area, and further south and east.
Put it this way, you wouldn't want it in YOUR neighborhood
Surely not for [edit] renovating a branch line and some extra points and signals. There's somethijng missing from the equation.
No, the changes/demolitions needed were huge, and for very little benefit (as Josias has accepted)
I examined them closely at the time! It was called the Camden Spur I think? Something like that
If you look at old HS2 documents online you'll probably find them still
There were enormous benefits for the people who really matter - i.e, people from the Red Wall keen to spend time i Tuscany, and not moany Remainers in Camden.
It would be doing the world (and Camden) a favour to demolish some parts of it.
(Speaking as a former resident of Camden).
If Camden had never existed, Ken Livingstone might never have got his big break in the late 70s.
Keep Hampstead, Highgate and Bloomsbury, and flatten everything in between.
(someone broke the quotes)
Not sure about Hampstead.
Just think how many annoying people that would remove. All those smug media types. Footballers competing for the biggest fishtank. Getting close to being a price worth paying,
Rupert Murdoch has signed up Piers Morgan and will launch a new TV network to challenge the BBC and GB News, in a move likely to further inflame Britain's culture wars
GB News will be down to a viewership of only those exiled from PB for causing England batting collapses.
I guess Fox has the advantage that they can reuse all their existing facilities, and probably some of their US programming.
But it does rather feel like two bald men fighting over a comb.
There is an argument for saying GB News' problem is not its target market - which is probably quite large - just the shambolic way it has been done.
In that way, it makes sense for Murdoch to come in plus he can cross-advertise / promote with his newspapers.
It has been shambolically launched - which is a surprise because I think both you and I know Paul Marshall, and he's usually a pretty shrewd operator.
But I'm not convinced there's that big a market for any network TV news channel in the UK. Simply, outside of waiting rooms in London offices (which are also going the way of the dodo), what is the combined viewership of TV news channels in the UK?
I mean, I guess Fox could effectively use the same reportage with a different set of commentators and make the numbers work, but video delivery is all VOD/YouTube/Instagram/TikTok these days, and viewership of even new channels in the US is cratering.
A curated set of commentators on on-line platforms with cross promotion could work. But I think the days of big centrally planned TV news channels are coming to an end.
Yes, although TBF, Marshall is not a media person and probably left it to others. I’m more surprised John Malone was involved and allowed it to develop in such a way.
I think on the potential audience, there are actually two types of ‘news’. The first is the traditional reporting type and, on that, there is no room for growth - the BBC has a natural advantage given its history, reputation etc although ITV ah as given it a shot (Sky News is just boring I find).
The second is, in reality, politicised entertainment. There I think there could be, especially with a Morgan at its helm. What you would want if you are News Corp is essentially a bunch of punchy, humorous, right-wing types taking the piss out of lefties. Is there a market for that? I think so. Maybe not on @pb though
Depending on how it is phased, China's application may be considered at the same time as the UK's.
China officially applies to join CPTPP.
CPTPP is the 11 country agreement that evolved from the TPP.
The TPP was the agreement the US drafted, negotiated and agreed but which never passed Congress and which President Trump pulled the US out of on his first (full) day in office.
The European Union has said that it will provide €30bn ($35.3bn; £25.6bn) over the next six years towards a new agency dealing with health preparedness and rapid response.
Rupert Murdoch has signed up Piers Morgan and will launch a new TV network to challenge the BBC and GB News, in a move likely to further inflame Britain's culture wars
GB News will be down to a viewership of only those exiled from PB for causing England batting collapses.
I guess Fox has the advantage that they can reuse all their existing facilities, and probably some of their US programming.
But it does rather feel like two bald men fighting over a comb.
There is an argument for saying GB News' problem is not its target market - which is probably quite large - just the shambolic way it has been done.
In that way, it makes sense for Murdoch to come in plus he can cross-advertise / promote with his newspapers.
It has been shambolically launched - which is a surprise because I think both you and I know Paul Marshall, and he's usually a pretty shrewd operator.
But I'm not convinced there's that big a market for any network TV news channel in the UK. Simply, outside of waiting rooms in London offices (which are also going the way of the dodo), what is the combined viewership of TV news channels in the UK?
I mean, I guess Fox could effectively use the same reportage with a different set of commentators and make the numbers work, but video delivery is all VOD/YouTube/Instagram/TikTok these days, and viewership of even new channels in the US is cratering.
A curated set of commentators on on-line platforms with cross promotion could work. But I think the days of big centrally planned TV news channels are coming to an end.
Yes, although TBF, Marshall is not a media person and probably left it to others. I’m more surprised John Malone was involved and allowed it to develop in such a way.
I think on the potential audience, there are actually two types of ‘news’. The first is the traditional reporting type and, on that, there is no room for growth - the BBC has a natural advantage given its history, reputation etc although ITV ah as given it a shot (Sky News is just boring I find).
The second is, in reality, politicised entertainment. There I think there could be, especially with a Morgan at its helm. What you would want if you are News Corp is essentially a bunch of punchy, humorous, right-wing types taking the piss out of lefties. Is there a market for that? I think so. Maybe not on @pb though
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
>< So frustrating. One thing I wish would take place is that you know whereabouts you are in which queue at A&E. It wouldn't cut the time, but knowing that would be helpful. Like there's 1 person triaged ahead of you for the ENT Doctor for instance. Expected wait time 1/2 hr...
Sympathies, Cyclefree - I do hope they can deal with it soon.
I once went for a clinic appointment with a particular specialist, nothing urgent but booked a week ahead. I took a large book. On arrival I was told the specialist would see me soon. I read a few chapters and after 90 minutes enquired about progress. The same receptionist said have patience, it could be a while yet. Another few chapters and another 90 minutes and I asked again, getting a different receptionist.
"Oh, Dr... hasn't come in today."
I did expostulate a little. To be fair they were apologetic and I got to see someone else 20 minutes later.
CPTPP is the 11 country agreement that evolved from the TPP.
The TPP was the agreement the US drafted, negotiated and agreed but which never passed Congress and which President Trump pulled the US out of on his first (full) day in office.
CPTPP is the 11 country agreement that evolved from the TPP.
The TPP was the agreement the US drafted, negotiated and agreed but which never passed Congress and which President Trump pulled the US out of on his first (full) day in office.
It doesn't stand out as much on the others, but if you just scroll quickly through this table you can clearly see a peak ending about a week ago in the shading.
Rupert Murdoch has signed up Piers Morgan and will launch a new TV network to challenge the BBC and GB News, in a move likely to further inflame Britain's culture wars
GB News will be down to a viewership of only those exiled from PB for causing England batting collapses.
I guess Fox has the advantage that they can reuse all their existing facilities, and probably some of their US programming.
But it does rather feel like two bald men fighting over a comb.
There is an argument for saying GB News' problem is not its target market - which is probably quite large - just the shambolic way it has been done.
In that way, it makes sense for Murdoch to come in plus he can cross-advertise / promote with his newspapers.
It has been shambolically launched - which is a surprise because I think both you and I know Paul Marshall, and he's usually a pretty shrewd operator.
But I'm not convinced there's that big a market for any network TV news channel in the UK. Simply, outside of waiting rooms in London offices (which are also going the way of the dodo), what is the combined viewership of TV news channels in the UK?
I mean, I guess Fox could effectively use the same reportage with a different set of commentators and make the numbers work, but video delivery is all VOD/YouTube/Instagram/TikTok these days, and viewership of even new channels in the US is cratering.
A curated set of commentators on on-line platforms with cross promotion could work. But I think the days of big centrally planned TV news channels are coming to an end.
Yes, although TBF, Marshall is not a media person and probably left it to others. I’m more surprised John Malone was involved and allowed it to develop in such a way.
I think on the potential audience, there are actually two types of ‘news’. The first is the traditional reporting type and, on that, there is no room for growth - the BBC has a natural advantage given its history, reputation etc although ITV ah as given it a shot (Sky News is just boring I find).
The second is, in reality, politicised entertainment. There I think there could be, especially with a Morgan at its helm. What you would want if you are News Corp is essentially a bunch of punchy, humorous, right-wing types taking the piss out of lefties. Is there a market for that? I think so. Maybe not on @pb though
Taken together, the end of the war in Afghanistan, the pivot against China, and the prioritization of the old Anglo alliances over the EU are all grand strategic moves. “When you make grand strategic moves,” the British official said, “you piss people off.”
The new military alliance to contain Beijing’s rise looks, then, at first glance, like a reassertion of the old order, but it is really one of the first murmurings of a new one taking its place.
Read a para. It seems a bit starting-from-here and constructing a 20-20 narrative. Is this true:
The basics are these: In 2016, Australia struck a deal with France to buy a fleet of diesel-powered submarines, rejecting an Anglo-American alternative for nuclear-powered vessels.
Were they offered such an alternative, or is this embroidery with fairy-stories?
I think the then Australian govt said "don't want Nukes" in the teeth of the RAN who said "we do".
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
>< So frustrating. One thing I wish would take place is that you know whereabouts you are in which queue at A&E. It wouldn't cut the time, but knowing that would be helpful. Like there's 1 person triaged ahead of you for the ENT Doctor for instance. Expected wait time 1/2 hr...
Sympathies, Cyclefree - I do hope they can deal with it soon.
I once went for a clinic appointment with a particular specialist, nothing urgent but booked a week ahead. I took a large book. On arrival I was told the specialist would see me soon. I read a few chapters and after 90 minutes enquired about progress. The same receptionist said have patience, it could be a while yet. Another few chapters and another 90 minutes and I asked again, getting a different receptionist.
"Oh, Dr... hasn't come in today."
I did expostulate a little. To be fair they were apologetic and I got to see someone else 20 minutes later.
And it was a good book.
I think I can beat that.
I went for an appointment with my surgeon. I hobbled to the hospital on crutches.
The receptionist said: "Oh, I'm sorry, I've been trying to contact you. The Prof isn't in today. He's asked me to apologise and say he's busy. But he's actually playing golf with Ayrton Senna."
That must have been a hard choice for him. Playing golf with Ayrton Senna or staring at my ankle.
CPTPP is the 11 country agreement that evolved from the TPP.
The TPP was the agreement the US drafted, negotiated and agreed but which never passed Congress and which President Trump pulled the US out of on his first (full) day in office.
Rupert Murdoch has signed up Piers Morgan and will launch a new TV network to challenge the BBC and GB News, in a move likely to further inflame Britain's culture wars
GB News will be down to a viewership of only those exiled from PB for causing England batting collapses.
I guess Fox has the advantage that they can reuse all their existing facilities, and probably some of their US programming.
But it does rather feel like two bald men fighting over a comb.
There is an argument for saying GB News' problem is not its target market - which is probably quite large - just the shambolic way it has been done.
In that way, it makes sense for Murdoch to come in plus he can cross-advertise / promote with his newspapers.
It has been shambolically launched - which is a surprise because I think both you and I know Paul Marshall, and he's usually a pretty shrewd operator.
But I'm not convinced there's that big a market for any network TV news channel in the UK. Simply, outside of waiting rooms in London offices (which are also going the way of the dodo), what is the combined viewership of TV news channels in the UK?
I mean, I guess Fox could effectively use the same reportage with a different set of commentators and make the numbers work, but video delivery is all VOD/YouTube/Instagram/TikTok these days, and viewership of even new channels in the US is cratering.
A curated set of commentators on on-line platforms with cross promotion could work. But I think the days of big centrally planned TV news channels are coming to an end.
Yes, although TBF, Marshall is not a media person and probably left it to others. I’m more surprised John Malone was involved and allowed it to develop in such a way.
I think on the potential audience, there are actually two types of ‘news’. The first is the traditional reporting type and, on that, there is no room for growth - the BBC has a natural advantage given its history, reputation etc although ITV ah as given it a shot (Sky News is just boring I find).
The second is, in reality, politicised entertainment. There I think there could be, especially with a Morgan at its helm. What you would want if you are News Corp is essentially a bunch of punchy, humorous, right-wing types taking the piss out of lefties. Is there a market for that? I think so. Maybe not on @pb though
SPD and Grune and Linke still only gets to 48% though, SPD and Grune and FDP does get to 50%
I think this is an outlier for die Linke but I would be surprised if they poll less than 6% and get less than 3 constituency seats in East Berlin. I would be surprised if they got any constituency elsewhere though (like Leipzig/Dresden etc)
Assuming that FW and Sonstige(others) are not in the final shareout as they are below 5%, then 48 out of 90 will definitely be above 50%, therefore a majority.
I agree about the Linke 8% being an outlier (the other poll on the same day showed them still at 6). But as Gary and Davey say, the sPD is likely to have a choice - Greens plus FDP or Linke. I think Scholz would prefer the FDP, though that might lose some voters on the left. Probably we won't know at once as Scholz will trade off one against the other in negotiations.
On a lighter note, this is what the Greens in Germany want for a sleeper train network. It gets my vote!
Mine too. Some impossibly romantic journeys there. London to Venice. London to Barcelona. London to Naples. Wake up looking at Capri!
Edinburgh to Athens would be the ultimate but they've gotta get up and cross stations in London. Sorry about that
Yes, that's one reason why we need to build a direct link to HS2, so trains from Scotland/northern England can go direct to the continent. That said, I believe Paris suffers from the same issue (I could be wrong, I dare say the PB Train Experts will clarify).
From booking trains from Edinburgh to Avignon for my late dad, he had to change stations in both London and Paris. Might be different now, but I suspect the two countries both suffer from their capital=galactic centre symdrome and can't imagine that anyone might not automatically want to pay homage.
Certainly an issue in nations with Primate Cities. I mean, Londoners and Parisians do have a point. They are both fantastic cities. But we really do need to consider rail bypasses for both.
I'm not sure it is actually necessary to destroy Camden as Leon fears - my friend who lives there showed me once a spur running off the main line (into Euston) at the Regents Park Road bridge that headed off east and entered a tangle of tracks and viaducts in the former gas-metery wastelands north of the British Library, so there's something right there, though needing engineering at the St Pancras end. Maybe someone knows why this wasn't picked up on.
One would certainly hope there are options. There is indeed a spaghetti nest of railway lines up there. You'd think something would be possible?
Leon's 'destroy Camden' comments are just repetition of the Camden NIMBYs who were against the scheme - led in the media by a certain Stanley Johnson (I'm sure I've heard of him before?)
Besides, as SeanT Leon knows all too well, Camden has been cut through many times; the Regent's Canal, the railway in the 1850s, roads and developments - and it still manages to thrive.
In reality, the scheme was canned because it was massively expensive for very little benefit. It as a nice-to-have, not a necessity. So it was the first thing axed on the scheme.
FPT but if I may please - what was the main problem? I mean, there's already a railway almost all the way!
Josias is being glib. The plans for Camden were horrendous. A decade of enormous demolition and building, all around the central Market area, and further south and east.
Put it this way, you wouldn't want it in YOUR neighborhood
Surely not for [edit] renovating a branch line and some extra points and signals. There's somethijng missing from the equation.
No, the changes/demolitions needed were huge, and for very little benefit (as Josias has accepted)
I examined them closely at the time! It was called the Camden Spur I think? Something like that
If you look at old HS2 documents online you'll probably find them still
There were enormous benefits for the people who really matter - i.e, people from the Red Wall keen to spend time i Tuscany, and not moany Remainers in Camden.
Let's see 2-3 hours by plane from Newcastle / Manchester to Pisa or x hours on a train.
I know what I would pick most of the time, which is why those routes don't make any sense in real life.
Hours to get to airport , hours in security /queuing with same at other side, if we had a fraction of London infrastructure it would be train every time. Unfortunately funding never gets that far north.
Rupert Murdoch has signed up Piers Morgan and will launch a new TV network to challenge the BBC and GB News, in a move likely to further inflame Britain's culture wars
GB News will be down to a viewership of only those exiled from PB for causing England batting collapses.
I guess Fox has the advantage that they can reuse all their existing facilities, and probably some of their US programming.
But it does rather feel like two bald men fighting over a comb.
There is an argument for saying GB News' problem is not its target market - which is probably quite large - just the shambolic way it has been done.
In that way, it makes sense for Murdoch to come in plus he can cross-advertise / promote with his newspapers.
It has been shambolically launched - which is a surprise because I think both you and I know Paul Marshall, and he's usually a pretty shrewd operator.
But I'm not convinced there's that big a market for any network TV news channel in the UK. Simply, outside of waiting rooms in London offices (which are also going the way of the dodo), what is the combined viewership of TV news channels in the UK?
I mean, I guess Fox could effectively use the same reportage with a different set of commentators and make the numbers work, but video delivery is all VOD/YouTube/Instagram/TikTok these days, and viewership of even new channels in the US is cratering.
A curated set of commentators on on-line platforms with cross promotion could work. But I think the days of big centrally planned TV news channels are coming to an end.
Yes, although TBF, Marshall is not a media person and probably left it to others. I’m more surprised John Malone was involved and allowed it to develop in such a way.
I think on the potential audience, there are actually two types of ‘news’. The first is the traditional reporting type and, on that, there is no room for growth - the BBC has a natural advantage given its history, reputation etc although ITV ah as given it a shot (Sky News is just boring I find).
The second is, in reality, politicised entertainment. There I think there could be, especially with a Morgan at its helm. What you would want if you are News Corp is essentially a bunch of punchy, humorous, right-wing types taking the piss out of lefties. Is there a market for that? I think so. Maybe not on @pb though
SPD and Grune and Linke still only gets to 48% though, SPD and Grune and FDP does get to 50%
I think this is an outlier for die Linke but I would be surprised if they poll less than 6% and get less than 3 constituency seats in East Berlin. I would be surprised if they got any constituency elsewhere though (like Leipzig/Dresden etc)
Assuming that FW and Sonstige(others) are not in the final shareout as they are below 5%, then 48 out of 90 will definitely be above 50%, therefore a majority.
I agree about the Linke 8% being an outlier (the other poll on the same day showed them still at 6). But as Gary and Davey say, the sPD is likely to have a choice - Greens plus FDP or Linke. I think Scholz would prefer the FDP, though that might lose some voters on the left. Probably we won't know at once as Scholz will trade off one against the other in negotiations.
On a lighter note, this is what the Greens in Germany want for a sleeper train network. It gets my vote!
Mine too. Some impossibly romantic journeys there. London to Venice. London to Barcelona. London to Naples. Wake up looking at Capri!
Edinburgh to Athens would be the ultimate but they've gotta get up and cross stations in London. Sorry about that
Yes, that's one reason why we need to build a direct link to HS2, so trains from Scotland/northern England can go direct to the continent. That said, I believe Paris suffers from the same issue (I could be wrong, I dare say the PB Train Experts will clarify).
From booking trains from Edinburgh to Avignon for my late dad, he had to change stations in both London and Paris. Might be different now, but I suspect the two countries both suffer from their capital=galactic centre symdrome and can't imagine that anyone might not automatically want to pay homage.
Certainly an issue in nations with Primate Cities. I mean, Londoners and Parisians do have a point. They are both fantastic cities. But we really do need to consider rail bypasses for both.
I'm not sure it is actually necessary to destroy Camden as Leon fears - my friend who lives there showed me once a spur running off the main line (into Euston) at the Regents Park Road bridge that headed off east and entered a tangle of tracks and viaducts in the former gas-metery wastelands north of the British Library, so there's something right there, though needing engineering at the St Pancras end. Maybe someone knows why this wasn't picked up on.
One would certainly hope there are options. There is indeed a spaghetti nest of railway lines up there. You'd think something would be possible?
Leon's 'destroy Camden' comments are just repetition of the Camden NIMBYs who were against the scheme - led in the media by a certain Stanley Johnson (I'm sure I've heard of him before?)
Besides, as SeanT Leon knows all too well, Camden has been cut through many times; the Regent's Canal, the railway in the 1850s, roads and developments - and it still manages to thrive.
In reality, the scheme was canned because it was massively expensive for very little benefit. It as a nice-to-have, not a necessity. So it was the first thing axed on the scheme.
FPT but if I may please - what was the main problem? I mean, there's already a railway almost all the way!
Josias is being glib. The plans for Camden were horrendous. A decade of enormous demolition and building, all around the central Market area, and further south and east.
Put it this way, you wouldn't want it in YOUR neighborhood
Surely not for [edit] renovating a branch line and some extra points and signals. There's somethijng missing from the equation.
No, the changes/demolitions needed were huge, and for very little benefit (as Josias has accepted)
I examined them closely at the time! It was called the Camden Spur I think? Something like that
If you look at old HS2 documents online you'll probably find them still
There were enormous benefits for the people who really matter - i.e, people from the Red Wall keen to spend time i Tuscany, and not moany Remainers in Camden.
Let's see 2-3 hours by plane from Newcastle / Manchester to Pisa or x hours on a train.
I know what I would pick most of the time, which is why those routes don't make any sense in real life.
Hours to get to airport , hours in security /queuing with same at other side, if we had a fraction of London infrastructure it would be train every time. Unfortunately funding never gets that far north.
Twenty years ago, my then-gf had a friend who worked in Edinburgh, but had to be in London twice a week. She tried the train, and it was her backup. But almost all the time she went with (I think) EasyJet. Despite calling them SleazyJet.
Me? As it was billable, I'd take the train every time.
CPTPP is the 11 country agreement that evolved from the TPP.
The TPP was the agreement the US drafted, negotiated and agreed but which never passed Congress and which President Trump pulled the US out of on his first (full) day in office.
CPTPP is the 11 country agreement that evolved from the TPP.
The TPP was the agreement the US drafted, negotiated and agreed but which never passed Congress and which President Trump pulled the US out of on his first (full) day in office.
They probably want an official rejection so they can play the victim.
I'm sure that's right.
It's a real shame the US turned away from the TPP - if they'd joined, and then we'd followed, it would have been an amazing counterweight to China.
And probably more important (because of its breadth) than the new UK-US-AU partnership.
Would there be any chance the US would reverse its decision? Seems like a no-brainer, especially given developments here and the new pact?
Given the UK will almost certainly join in the next couple of years, the gravity of it will bring in the US eventually. The problem is the GOP are Trumpian idiots that see any international cooperation as betraying America and the Dems don't want to give the GOP something to beat them with.
A lot of people at that time (prior to Dave's conference speech) had a similar view of Cameron as many now have of Starmer. This is why, though I am not a Labour supporter, I would not write Starmer off
Isn't it more likely that Dave's bounce was mainly to do with it being the first time people had seen Brown up close as leader? Lots of people compare Starmer's progress at LotO with Cameron's, but don't usually consider that his opponent changed from being a charismatic, serial winner to a dour, uncharismatic drag on votes halfway through
There are similarities between Brown and Johnson, and it isn't that they are/both borderline obese . Both are essentially incompetent and arrogant even by the standards of politicians. Johnson is more likeable than Brown, but Brown arguably more able than Johnson. Both will probably go down in history as the worst PMs we have ever put into No10. Brown was sunk in the end by his own hubris. I don't know for sure whether the same will apply to The Clown, but I think it is highly likely.
Rupert Murdoch has signed up Piers Morgan and will launch a new TV network to challenge the BBC and GB News, in a move likely to further inflame Britain's culture wars
GB News will be down to a viewership of only those exiled from PB for causing England batting collapses.
I guess Fox has the advantage that they can reuse all their existing facilities, and probably some of their US programming.
But it does rather feel like two bald men fighting over a comb.
There is an argument for saying GB News' problem is not its target market - which is probably quite large - just the shambolic way it has been done.
In that way, it makes sense for Murdoch to come in plus he can cross-advertise / promote with his newspapers.
It wasn't just the shambles of the tech side, weird mishmash of hires of fringe antivax / antilockdown loonie types, mainly of Talk Radio, plus piss poor presenters who have had a go on other channels mixed with old long in the tooth lesser known faces off BBC / Sky.
If they had managed to hire the likes of say Ferrari, Morgan, fresh face like a Freddie Sayers, who is super smart and different to usual news channel types without being a nutter, plus Farage and Neill, not necessarily my cup of tea, but it would have got ratings.
I expect Murdoch is about to show GB News how it is done. Piers already signed up.
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
>< So frustrating. One thing I wish would take place is that you know whereabouts you are in which queue at A&E. It wouldn't cut the time, but knowing that would be helpful. Like there's 1 person triaged ahead of you for the ENT Doctor for instance. Expected wait time 1/2 hr...
Sympathies, Cyclefree - I do hope they can deal with it soon.
I once went for a clinic appointment with a particular specialist, nothing urgent but booked a week ahead. I took a large book. On arrival I was told the specialist would see me soon. I read a few chapters and after 90 minutes enquired about progress. The same receptionist said have patience, it could be a while yet. Another few chapters and another 90 minutes and I asked again, getting a different receptionist.
"Oh, Dr... hasn't come in today."
I did expostulate a little. To be fair they were apologetic and I got to see someone else 20 minutes later.
And it was a good book.
I think I can beat that.
I went for an appointment with my surgeon. I hobbled to the hospital on crutches.
The receptionist said: "Oh, I'm sorry, I've been trying to contact you. The Prof isn't in today. He's asked me to apologise and say he's busy. But he's actually playing golf with Ayrton Senna."
That must have been a hard choice for him. Playing golf with Ayrton Senna or staring at my ankle.
That was Prof. Sid Watkins, the hero of F1, wasn’t it
24 hours a day of people saying on TV that they are not allowed to say on TV what they are saying TV.
Although I find the GB News everything is woke stuff tiresome, this argument is also rather disingenuous.
Often the issue is that
a) organisations are making crazy decisions about things that they deem are unsayable / offensive, that outside some niche twitter echo-chamber nobody thinks that
and
b) the whole point is unless you are in a particular privileged or powerful position, e.g. on a tv channel that has decided they will do precisely this, you won't be able to say this stuff or be silenced. Ricky Gervais or Jimmy Carr only get away with their comedy because they are already massive and even JK Rowling had all those issues with her publisher with a big campaign to have them drop her.
There was a really revealing interview between 3 comedians I linked the other day. The one had come with the BBC to interview about this issue in comedy and she started off with all the right PC terms and the "correct" opinions etc, and by the end she had lapsed into its absolutely shit, I have to be so careful, self censor myself, its bollocks etc, realised she had and then said this won't be able to go in the BBC documentary. We only got to see it because the guys being interviewed recorded it.
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
>< So frustrating. One thing I wish would take place is that you know whereabouts you are in which queue at A&E. It wouldn't cut the time, but knowing that would be helpful. Like there's 1 person triaged ahead of you for the ENT Doctor for instance. Expected wait time 1/2 hr...
Sympathies, Cyclefree - I do hope they can deal with it soon.
I once went for a clinic appointment with a particular specialist, nothing urgent but booked a week ahead. I took a large book. On arrival I was told the specialist would see me soon. I read a few chapters and after 90 minutes enquired about progress. The same receptionist said have patience, it could be a while yet. Another few chapters and another 90 minutes and I asked again, getting a different receptionist.
"Oh, Dr... hasn't come in today."
I did expostulate a little. To be fair they were apologetic and I got to see someone else 20 minutes later.
And it was a good book.
I think I can beat that.
I went for an appointment with my surgeon. I hobbled to the hospital on crutches.
The receptionist said: "Oh, I'm sorry, I've been trying to contact you. The Prof isn't in today. He's asked me to apologise and say he's busy. But he's actually playing golf with Ayrton Senna."
That must have been a hard choice for him. Playing golf with Ayrton Senna or staring at my ankle.
That was Prof. Sid Watkins, the hero of F1, wasn’t it
Yep. Have I mentioned that before?
(I had no idea who he was before that cancellation. As I was a young F1 fan, I was rather blown away.)
CPTPP is the 11 country agreement that evolved from the TPP.
The TPP was the agreement the US drafted, negotiated and agreed but which never passed Congress and which President Trump pulled the US out of on his first (full) day in office.
They probably want an official rejection so they can play the victim.
I'm sure that's right.
It's a real shame the US turned away from the TPP - if they'd joined, and then we'd followed, it would have been an amazing counterweight to China.
And probably more important (because of its breadth) than the new UK-US-AU partnership.
Would there be any chance the US would reverse its decision? Seems like a no-brainer, especially given developments here and the new pact?
Can I just have a small moan about Trump? He correctly identified China as the West's Problem Number One, but then blew up relations with lots of natural allies for dealing with China. Every signatory of the TPP is terrified of China, and was dying for an American led alternative to Chinese economic hegemony in the Pacific.
Now, I think Biden is disinterested in the TPP (and trade generally), so I don't think he's going to want to join. And I don't think Trump is going to change his mind. So, realistically, I don't think the US will join.
A lot of people at that time (prior to Dave's conference speech) had a similar view of Cameron as many now have of Starmer. This is why, though I am not a Labour supporter, I would not write Starmer off
Isn't it more likely that Dave's bounce was mainly to do with it being the first time people had seen Brown up close as leader? Lots of people compare Starmer's progress at LotO with Cameron's, but don't usually consider that his opponent changed from being a charismatic, serial winner to a dour, uncharismatic drag on votes halfway through
There are similarities between Brown and Johnson, and it isn't that they are/both borderline obese . Both are essentially incompetent and arrogant even by the standards of politicians. Johnson is more likeable than Brown, but Brown arguably more able than Johnson. Both will probably go down in history as the worst PMs we have ever put into No10. Brown was sunk in the end by his own hubris. I don't know for sure whether the same will apply to The Clown, but I think it is highly likely.
I am just going by the polls rather than my personal opinion, and Boris is better liked and more charismatic than Sir Keir, by that metric - Cameron was less popular and charismatic than Blair, but more so than Brown, hence I think we have to factor in the change in Labour leader during that period before trying to imagine Sir Keir getting a Dave style transformation in ratings
A lot of people at that time (prior to Dave's conference speech) had a similar view of Cameron as many now have of Starmer. This is why, though I am not a Labour supporter, I would not write Starmer off
The comparison between Cameron and Starmer is extremely weak.
Cameron managed consistent poll leads from September 2005 to June 2007. Brown managed consistent poll leads then from July 2007 with Cameron regaining consistent leads again by October. By the 2010 election Cameron had achieved polling leads for all but 3 months of his leadership. July - Sept 2007 were the only months in the 4.5 years he was opposition leader that he didn't have very consistent poll leads.
In contrast Starmer has achieved consistent poll leads: Never
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
>< So frustrating. One thing I wish would take place is that you know whereabouts you are in which queue at A&E. It wouldn't cut the time, but knowing that would be helpful. Like there's 1 person triaged ahead of you for the ENT Doctor for instance. Expected wait time 1/2 hr...
A good idea rather than going to A&E it to call 111 and ask for help. In July last year I had an unusual swelling of my leg on a Sunday afternoon. At 2pm the 111 person put me through to a doctor with whom I'm spoke for a few minutes. He said he would need to refer and five minutes later another doc called me and said they really needed to see it. He said they needed to keep me away from A&E because of COVID. It was arranged that I should go to a specific location quite the near the maternity reception at 4.30pm where I was to just wait. I saw the doc, at 4.40Pm. The only person a came close to was the doc.
It appears that the 111 service has a different triage system
SPD and Grune and Linke still only gets to 48% though, SPD and Grune and FDP does get to 50%
I think this is an outlier for die Linke but I would be surprised if they poll less than 6% and get less than 3 constituency seats in East Berlin. I would be surprised if they got any constituency elsewhere though (like Leipzig/Dresden etc)
Assuming that FW and Sonstige(others) are not in the final shareout as they are below 5%, then 48 out of 90 will definitely be above 50%, therefore a majority.
I agree about the Linke 8% being an outlier (the other poll on the same day showed them still at 6). But as Gary and Davey say, the sPD is likely to have a choice - Greens plus FDP or Linke. I think Scholz would prefer the FDP, though that might lose some voters on the left. Probably we won't know at once as Scholz will trade off one against the other in negotiations.
On a lighter note, this is what the Greens in Germany want for a sleeper train network. It gets my vote!
Mine too. Some impossibly romantic journeys there. London to Venice. London to Barcelona. London to Naples. Wake up looking at Capri!
Edinburgh to Athens would be the ultimate but they've gotta get up and cross stations in London. Sorry about that
Yes, that's one reason why we need to build a direct link to HS2, so trains from Scotland/northern England can go direct to the continent. That said, I believe Paris suffers from the same issue (I could be wrong, I dare say the PB Train Experts will clarify).
From booking trains from Edinburgh to Avignon for my late dad, he had to change stations in both London and Paris. Might be different now, but I suspect the two countries both suffer from their capital=galactic centre symdrome and can't imagine that anyone might not automatically want to pay homage.
Certainly an issue in nations with Primate Cities. I mean, Londoners and Parisians do have a point. They are both fantastic cities. But we really do need to consider rail bypasses for both.
I'm not sure it is actually necessary to destroy Camden as Leon fears - my friend who lives there showed me once a spur running off the main line (into Euston) at the Regents Park Road bridge that headed off east and entered a tangle of tracks and viaducts in the former gas-metery wastelands north of the British Library, so there's something right there, though needing engineering at the St Pancras end. Maybe someone knows why this wasn't picked up on.
One would certainly hope there are options. There is indeed a spaghetti nest of railway lines up there. You'd think something would be possible?
Leon's 'destroy Camden' comments are just repetition of the Camden NIMBYs who were against the scheme - led in the media by a certain Stanley Johnson (I'm sure I've heard of him before?)
Besides, as SeanT Leon knows all too well, Camden has been cut through many times; the Regent's Canal, the railway in the 1850s, roads and developments - and it still manages to thrive.
In reality, the scheme was canned because it was massively expensive for very little benefit. It as a nice-to-have, not a necessity. So it was the first thing axed on the scheme.
FPT but if I may please - what was the main problem? I mean, there's already a railway almost all the way!
Josias is being glib. The plans for Camden were horrendous. A decade of enormous demolition and building, all around the central Market area, and further south and east.
Put it this way, you wouldn't want it in YOUR neighborhood
Surely not for [edit] renovating a branch line and some extra points and signals. There's somethijng missing from the equation.
No, the changes/demolitions needed were huge, and for very little benefit (as Josias has accepted)
I examined them closely at the time! It was called the Camden Spur I think? Something like that
If you look at old HS2 documents online you'll probably find them still
There were enormous benefits for the people who really matter - i.e, people from the Red Wall keen to spend time i Tuscany, and not moany Remainers in Camden.
Let's see 2-3 hours by plane from Newcastle / Manchester to Pisa or x hours on a train.
I know what I would pick most of the time, which is why those routes don't make any sense in real life.
Hours to get to airport , hours in security /queuing with same at other side, if we had a fraction of London infrastructure it would be train every time. Unfortunately funding never gets that far north.
Twenty years ago, my then-gf had a friend who worked in Edinburgh, but had to be in London twice a week. She tried the train, and it was her backup. But almost all the time she went with (I think) EasyJet. Despite calling them SleazyJet.
Me? As it was billable, I'd take the train every time.
There is little if any difference in travelling time between train and plane to London from Scotland when you count the hours spent either side of the flight just a case if you could get an early train. They have improved local trains starting much earlier to get to mainline stations. Journey always more relaxing than the stress and hassle of airport security etc etc.
The most important thing I've learned today is that Zahawi used to work for Jeffrey Archer. Thanks BBC, I cannot imagine why people focus on the YouGov stuff instead.
The most important thing I've learned today is that Zahawi used to work for Jeffrey Archer. Thanks BBC, I cannot imagine why people focus on the YouGov stuff instead.
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
>< So frustrating. One thing I wish would take place is that you know whereabouts you are in which queue at A&E. It wouldn't cut the time, but knowing that would be helpful. Like there's 1 person triaged ahead of you for the ENT Doctor for instance. Expected wait time 1/2 hr...
A good idea rather than going to A&E it to call 111 and ask for help. In July last year I had an unusual swelling of my leg on a Sunday afternoon. At 2pm the 111 person put me through to a doctor with whom I'm spoke for a few minutes. He said he would need to refer and five minutes later another doc called me and said they really needed to see it. He said they needed to keep me away from A&E because of COVID. It was arranged that I should go to a place quite the maternity reception at 4.30pm where I was to just wait. I saw the doc, at 4.40Pm
It appears that the 111 service has a different triage system
You were very lucky Mike , normally they tell you to take a paracetamol and see your GP if you are lucky.
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
>< So frustrating. One thing I wish would take place is that you know whereabouts you are in which queue at A&E. It wouldn't cut the time, but knowing that would be helpful. Like there's 1 person triaged ahead of you for the ENT Doctor for instance. Expected wait time 1/2 hr...
A good idea rather than going to A&E it to call 111 and ask for help. In July last year I had an unusual swelling of my leg on a Sunday afternoon. At 2pm the 111 person put me through to a doctor with whom I'm spoke for a few minutes. He said he would need to refer and five minutes later another doc called me and said they really needed to see it. He said they needed to keep me away from A&E because of COVID. It was arranged that I should go to a place quite the maternity reception at 4.30pm where I was to just wait. I saw the doc, at 4.40Pm
It appears that the 111 service has a different triage system
You were very lucky Mike , normally they tell you to take a paracetamol and see your GP if you are lucky.
My father had exactly the same experience as Mike.
SPD and Grune and Linke still only gets to 48% though, SPD and Grune and FDP does get to 50%
I think this is an outlier for die Linke but I would be surprised if they poll less than 6% and get less than 3 constituency seats in East Berlin. I would be surprised if they got any constituency elsewhere though (like Leipzig/Dresden etc)
Assuming that FW and Sonstige(others) are not in the final shareout as they are below 5%, then 48 out of 90 will definitely be above 50%, therefore a majority.
I agree about the Linke 8% being an outlier (the other poll on the same day showed them still at 6). But as Gary and Davey say, the sPD is likely to have a choice - Greens plus FDP or Linke. I think Scholz would prefer the FDP, though that might lose some voters on the left. Probably we won't know at once as Scholz will trade off one against the other in negotiations.
On a lighter note, this is what the Greens in Germany want for a sleeper train network. It gets my vote!
Mine too. Some impossibly romantic journeys there. London to Venice. London to Barcelona. London to Naples. Wake up looking at Capri!
Edinburgh to Athens would be the ultimate but they've gotta get up and cross stations in London. Sorry about that
Yes, that's one reason why we need to build a direct link to HS2, so trains from Scotland/northern England can go direct to the continent. That said, I believe Paris suffers from the same issue (I could be wrong, I dare say the PB Train Experts will clarify).
From booking trains from Edinburgh to Avignon for my late dad, he had to change stations in both London and Paris. Might be different now, but I suspect the two countries both suffer from their capital=galactic centre symdrome and can't imagine that anyone might not automatically want to pay homage.
Certainly an issue in nations with Primate Cities. I mean, Londoners and Parisians do have a point. They are both fantastic cities. But we really do need to consider rail bypasses for both.
I'm not sure it is actually necessary to destroy Camden as Leon fears - my friend who lives there showed me once a spur running off the main line (into Euston) at the Regents Park Road bridge that headed off east and entered a tangle of tracks and viaducts in the former gas-metery wastelands north of the British Library, so there's something right there, though needing engineering at the St Pancras end. Maybe someone knows why this wasn't picked up on.
One would certainly hope there are options. There is indeed a spaghetti nest of railway lines up there. You'd think something would be possible?
Leon's 'destroy Camden' comments are just repetition of the Camden NIMBYs who were against the scheme - led in the media by a certain Stanley Johnson (I'm sure I've heard of him before?)
Besides, as SeanT Leon knows all too well, Camden has been cut through many times; the Regent's Canal, the railway in the 1850s, roads and developments - and it still manages to thrive.
In reality, the scheme was canned because it was massively expensive for very little benefit. It as a nice-to-have, not a necessity. So it was the first thing axed on the scheme.
FPT but if I may please - what was the main problem? I mean, there's already a railway almost all the way!
Josias is being glib. The plans for Camden were horrendous. A decade of enormous demolition and building, all around the central Market area, and further south and east.
Put it this way, you wouldn't want it in YOUR neighborhood
Surely not for [edit] renovating a branch line and some extra points and signals. There's somethijng missing from the equation.
No, the changes/demolitions needed were huge, and for very little benefit (as Josias has accepted)
I examined them closely at the time! It was called the Camden Spur I think? Something like that
If you look at old HS2 documents online you'll probably find them still
There were enormous benefits for the people who really matter - i.e, people from the Red Wall keen to spend time i Tuscany, and not moany Remainers in Camden.
Let's see 2-3 hours by plane from Newcastle / Manchester to Pisa or x hours on a train.
I know what I would pick most of the time, which is why those routes don't make any sense in real life.
Hours to get to airport , hours in security /queuing with same at other side, if we had a fraction of London infrastructure it would be train every time. Unfortunately funding never gets that far north.
Twenty years ago, my then-gf had a friend who worked in Edinburgh, but had to be in London twice a week. She tried the train, and it was her backup. But almost all the time she went with (I think) EasyJet. Despite calling them SleazyJet.
Me? As it was billable, I'd take the train every time.
There is little if any difference in travelling time between train and plane to London from Scotland when you count the hours spent either side of the flight just a case if you could get an early train. They have improved local trains starting much earlier to get to mainline stations. Journey always more relaxing than the stress and hassle of airport security etc etc.
That's the odd thing. She lived in Leith. I don't know the Lothian bus routes, especially at the time, but I can't see Leith to the airport being shorter than Leith to Waverley.
CPTPP is the 11 country agreement that evolved from the TPP.
The TPP was the agreement the US drafted, negotiated and agreed but which never passed Congress and which President Trump pulled the US out of on his first (full) day in office.
They probably want an official rejection so they can play the victim.
I'm sure that's right.
It's a real shame the US turned away from the TPP - if they'd joined, and then we'd followed, it would have been an amazing counterweight to China.
And probably more important (because of its breadth) than the new UK-US-AU partnership.
Would there be any chance the US would reverse its decision? Seems like a no-brainer, especially given developments here and the new pact?
Can I just have a small moan about Trump? He correctly identified China as the West's Problem Number One, but then blew up relations with lots of natural allies for dealing with China. Every signatory of the TPP is terrified of China, and was dying for an American led alternative to Chinese economic hegemony in the Pacific.
Now, I think Biden is disinterested in the TPP (and trade generally), so I don't think he's going to want to join. And I don't think Trump is going to change his mind. So, realistically, I don't think the US will join.
Which is a real shame.
Your third sentence is why I find the insouciant view that UK will be admitted and PRC won't so baffling.
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
>< So frustrating. One thing I wish would take place is that you know whereabouts you are in which queue at A&E. It wouldn't cut the time, but knowing that would be helpful. Like there's 1 person triaged ahead of you for the ENT Doctor for instance. Expected wait time 1/2 hr...
Surely A&E shouldn't sensibly operate based on a queue system and instead based upon the seriousness of the complaint being triaged?
Though when we went to A&E when my wife had a fall (on black ice) while heavily pregnant the receptionist made a mistake on our triage which meant we weren't seen for many hours when it should have really been seen immediately. Thankfully all ended up OK but it could have been worse.
Cher Gérard, je ne crois pas que ce soit la description la plus juste de la négociation de 2013-2016. La France ne transfère pas de propulsion nucléaire, comme tu le sais bien.[Dear Gérard, I do not believe that this is the most accurate description of the 2013-2016 negotiations. France does not transfer nuclear propulsion, as you well know.]
Rupert Murdoch has signed up Piers Morgan and will launch a new TV network to challenge the BBC and GB News, in a move likely to further inflame Britain's culture wars
GB News will be down to a viewership of only those exiled from PB for causing England batting collapses.
I guess Fox has the advantage that they can reuse all their existing facilities, and probably some of their US programming.
But it does rather feel like two bald men fighting over a comb.
There is an argument for saying GB News' problem is not its target market - which is probably quite large - just the shambolic way it has been done.
In that way, it makes sense for Murdoch to come in plus he can cross-advertise / promote with his newspapers.
It has been shambolically launched - which is a surprise because I think both you and I know Paul Marshall, and he's usually a pretty shrewd operator.
But I'm not convinced there's that big a market for any network TV news channel in the UK. Simply, outside of waiting rooms in London offices (which are also going the way of the dodo), what is the combined viewership of TV news channels in the UK?
I mean, I guess Fox could effectively use the same reportage with a different set of commentators and make the numbers work, but video delivery is all VOD/YouTube/Instagram/TikTok these days, and viewership of even new channels in the US is cratering.
A curated set of commentators on on-line platforms with cross promotion could work. But I think the days of big centrally planned TV news channels are coming to an end.
Yes, although TBF, Marshall is not a media person and probably left it to others. I’m more surprised John Malone was involved and allowed it to develop in such a way.
I think on the potential audience, there are actually two types of ‘news’. The first is the traditional reporting type and, on that, there is no room for growth - the BBC has a natural advantage given its history, reputation etc although ITV ah as given it a shot (Sky News is just boring I find).
The second is, in reality, politicised entertainment. There I think there could be, especially with a Morgan at its helm. What you would want if you are News Corp is essentially a bunch of punchy, humorous, right-wing types taking the piss out of lefties. Is there a market for that? I think so. Maybe not on @pb though
"A bunch of punchy humorous right-wing types taking the piss out of lefties."
I know what you mean - that does sound great - but if I were them I wouldn't be keen on going in that direction. It's the sort of thing that works really really well in Bullingdon or raffish drinking club type settings, everyone simpatico and boozed up, the alcohol sharpening their wit and driving them on to ever more wickedly funny flights of fancy, but I don't see it translating to live TV. Lots of what might appear brilliant to the people in the studio could come across to those watching at home as crass and a bit cliched.
The trick is to win the elections, not the conferences.
Dave won every general election he contested as leader.
Depending what you mean by won. Con maj 2010 was there for the taking.
Most seats/most votes counts as a victory.
The fact he became PM means it was a victory.
As this puts Dave’s achievement into context.
Somewhat remarkable Heath got to fight 1970 from those figures.
In those days - and really up until the end of Kinnock post-1987 - you got to keep fighting General Elections until you won. What proportion of Conservative and Labour leaders between 1945 and 1990 did not end up Prime Minister?
It has to be well under 20%.
Good point. Can only think of Gaitskell. For unfortunate reasons. And Foot for more obvious ones. Not a single Tory. Wonder what changed? I would argue, Kinnock too was a special case, losing an election pretty comfortably he was widely expected to win. Tories under Blair really started the ditching the leader after one defeat. Or none in IDS' case.
Edit. Oops. You've covered that. So, who was the Tory leader before Hague never to be PM? 19th Century I reckon.
I don't think Kinnock was expected to win the 1992 election - but to at least deprive the Tories of a majority and possibly lead the largest party .
Yes. Schaarbeek. We would stay in Bruges though - a lovely town.
5 and a half hours in A&E and still waiting.....
>< So frustrating. One thing I wish would take place is that you know whereabouts you are in which queue at A&E. It wouldn't cut the time, but knowing that would be helpful. Like there's 1 person triaged ahead of you for the ENT Doctor for instance. Expected wait time 1/2 hr...
A good idea rather than going to A&E it to call 111 and ask for help. In July last year I had an unusual swelling of my leg on a Sunday afternoon. At 2pm the 111 person put me through to a doctor with whom I'm spoke for a few minutes. He said he would need to refer and five minutes later another doc called me and said they really needed to see it. He said they needed to keep me away from A&E because of COVID. It was arranged that I should go to a specific location quite the near the maternity reception at 4.30pm where I was to just wait. I saw the doc, at 4.40Pm. The only person a came close to was the doc.
It appears that the 111 service has a different triage system
Also, what works in W Devon: ALWAYS go first to the little hospital in Tavistock, not in the hope of being treated but because if they can't treat you they will send you on to Derriford in Plymouth with a letter saying Dear Derriford, this patient is fcuked beyond any hope of our fixing him, love and kisses, and that letter gets you to the front of the Derriford queue.
The trick is to win the elections, not the conferences.
Dave won every general election he contested as leader.
Depending what you mean by won. Con maj 2010 was there for the taking.
Most seats/most votes counts as a victory.
The fact he became PM means it was a victory.
As this puts Dave’s achievement into context.
Somewhat remarkable Heath got to fight 1970 from those figures.
In those days - and really up until the end of Kinnock post-1987 - you got to keep fighting General Elections until you won. What proportion of Conservative and Labour leaders between 1945 and 1990 did not end up Prime Minister?
It has to be well under 20%.
Good point. Can only think of Gaitskell. For unfortunate reasons. And Foot for more obvious ones. Not a single Tory. Wonder what changed? I would argue, Kinnock too was a special case, losing an election pretty comfortably he was widely expected to win. Tories under Blair really started the ditching the leader after one defeat. Or none in IDS' case.
Edit. Oops. You've covered that. So, who was the Tory leader before Hague never to be PM? 19th Century I reckon.
I don't think there was one. The modern Conservative Party started with Peel, and every leader until Hague had at least a little time in Number Ten.
Thoughts and prayers for iSAGE and the modelling teams.
I believe the goalpost have now shifted to you just wait until the winter, its going to be terrible, and the government should be introducing new restrictions now.
Been out and about in God’s own county this afternoon so not been on PB. I assume TSE is now a fully paid member of the Boris Johnson fan club given how much we’ve annoyed the French?
SPD and Grune and Linke still only gets to 48% though, SPD and Grune and FDP does get to 50%
I think this is an outlier for die Linke but I would be surprised if they poll less than 6% and get less than 3 constituency seats in East Berlin. I would be surprised if they got any constituency elsewhere though (like Leipzig/Dresden etc)
Assuming that FW and Sonstige(others) are not in the final shareout as they are below 5%, then 48 out of 90 will definitely be above 50%, therefore a majority.
I agree about the Linke 8% being an outlier (the other poll on the same day showed them still at 6). But as Gary and Davey say, the sPD is likely to have a choice - Greens plus FDP or Linke. I think Scholz would prefer the FDP, though that might lose some voters on the left. Probably we won't know at once as Scholz will trade off one against the other in negotiations.
On a lighter note, this is what the Greens in Germany want for a sleeper train network. It gets my vote!
Mine too. Some impossibly romantic journeys there. London to Venice. London to Barcelona. London to Naples. Wake up looking at Capri!
Edinburgh to Athens would be the ultimate but they've gotta get up and cross stations in London. Sorry about that
Yes, that's one reason why we need to build a direct link to HS2, so trains from Scotland/northern England can go direct to the continent. That said, I believe Paris suffers from the same issue (I could be wrong, I dare say the PB Train Experts will clarify).
From booking trains from Edinburgh to Avignon for my late dad, he had to change stations in both London and Paris. Might be different now, but I suspect the two countries both suffer from their capital=galactic centre symdrome and can't imagine that anyone might not automatically want to pay homage.
Certainly an issue in nations with Primate Cities. I mean, Londoners and Parisians do have a point. They are both fantastic cities. But we really do need to consider rail bypasses for both.
I'm not sure it is actually necessary to destroy Camden as Leon fears - my friend who lives there showed me once a spur running off the main line (into Euston) at the Regents Park Road bridge that headed off east and entered a tangle of tracks and viaducts in the former gas-metery wastelands north of the British Library, so there's something right there, though needing engineering at the St Pancras end. Maybe someone knows why this wasn't picked up on.
One would certainly hope there are options. There is indeed a spaghetti nest of railway lines up there. You'd think something would be possible?
Leon's 'destroy Camden' comments are just repetition of the Camden NIMBYs who were against the scheme - led in the media by a certain Stanley Johnson (I'm sure I've heard of him before?)
Besides, as SeanT Leon knows all too well, Camden has been cut through many times; the Regent's Canal, the railway in the 1850s, roads and developments - and it still manages to thrive.
In reality, the scheme was canned because it was massively expensive for very little benefit. It as a nice-to-have, not a necessity. So it was the first thing axed on the scheme.
FPT but if I may please - what was the main problem? I mean, there's already a railway almost all the way!
Josias is being glib. The plans for Camden were horrendous. A decade of enormous demolition and building, all around the central Market area, and further south and east.
Put it this way, you wouldn't want it in YOUR neighborhood
Surely not for [edit] renovating a branch line and some extra points and signals. There's somethijng missing from the equation.
No, the changes/demolitions needed were huge, and for very little benefit (as Josias has accepted)
I examined them closely at the time! It was called the Camden Spur I think? Something like that
If you look at old HS2 documents online you'll probably find them still
There were enormous benefits for the people who really matter - i.e, people from the Red Wall keen to spend time i Tuscany, and not moany Remainers in Camden.
Let's see 2-3 hours by plane from Newcastle / Manchester to Pisa or x hours on a train.
I know what I would pick most of the time, which is why those routes don't make any sense in real life.
Hours to get to airport , hours in security /queuing with same at other side, if we had a fraction of London infrastructure it would be train every time. Unfortunately funding never gets that far north.
Twenty years ago, my then-gf had a friend who worked in Edinburgh, but had to be in London twice a week. She tried the train, and it was her backup. But almost all the time she went with (I think) EasyJet. Despite calling them SleazyJet.
Me? As it was billable, I'd take the train every time.
There is little if any difference in travelling time between train and plane to London from Scotland when you count the hours spent either side of the flight just a case if you could get an early train. They have improved local trains starting much earlier to get to mainline stations. Journey always more relaxing than the stress and hassle of airport security etc etc.
This is what I've found but, unfortunately, the earliest train in the morning from Edinburgh doesn't reach Kings Cross until 09:30, and you still need to travel on to your final destination. But you can take the first flight of the day to Gatwick and reach most places in London before the train reaches the outskirts of the metropolis.
I see twitter are very angry that BBC bod has shared the video of Humza Yousaf going arse over tit after going too fast on his scooter thingy for his bad leg.
BBC Three set to return as TV channel after Ofcom gives green light Service was taken off air in 2016, but corporation says some younger viewers still want linear TV
Who....I don't know a single kid who watches "linear tv". In fact, hardly any tv at all....its all YouTube, Twitch, Social Media, then Netflix....then "tv".
Thoughts and prayers for iSAGE and the modelling teams.
I believe the goalpost have now shifted to you just wait until the winter, its going to be terrible, and the government should be introducing new restrictions now.
What about the children and schools going back.....it's mainly "Long COVID" now - which benefits (sic) from having no set definition or single clinical presentation...
Thoughts and prayers for iSAGE and the modelling teams.
I believe the goalpost have now shifted to you just wait until the winter, its going to be terrible, and the government should be introducing new restrictions now.
BBC Three set to return as TV channel after Ofcom gives green light Service was taken off air in 2016, but corporation says some younger viewers still want linear TV
Who....I don't know a single kid who watches "linear tv". In fact, hardly any tv at all....its all YouTube, Twitch, Social Media, then Netflix....then "tv".
My little 'un does. With a healthy amount of Youtube as well.
BBC Three set to return as TV channel after Ofcom gives green light Service was taken off air in 2016, but corporation says some younger viewers still want linear TV
Who....I don't know a single kid who watches "linear tv". In fact, hardly any tv at all....its all YouTube, Twitch, Social Media, then Netflix....then "tv".
Comparing some of the recent prime time peak ratings to viewer-shares, not that many adults are watching linear tv either.
BBC Three set to return as TV channel after Ofcom gives green light Service was taken off air in 2016, but corporation says some younger viewers still want linear TV
Who....I don't know a single kid who watches "linear tv". In fact, hardly any tv at all....its all YouTube, Twitch, Social Media, then Netflix....then "tv".
Comparing some of the recent peak time peak ratings to viewer-shares, not that many adults are watching linear tv either.
Other than live sport, I never watch any live telly.
Thoughts and prayers for iSAGE and the modelling teams.
I believe the goalpost have now shifted to you just wait until the winter, its going to be terrible, and the government should be introducing new restrictions now.
Just wait until we REALLY Brexit.
I see; we're going to be lobbing bombs across our one land border, are we?
The trick is to win the elections, not the conferences.
Dave won every general election he contested as leader.
Depending what you mean by won. Con maj 2010 was there for the taking.
Most seats/most votes counts as a victory.
The fact he became PM means it was a victory.
As this puts Dave’s achievement into context.
Somewhat remarkable Heath got to fight 1970 from those figures.
In those days - and really up until the end of Kinnock post-1987 - you got to keep fighting General Elections until you won. What proportion of Conservative and Labour leaders between 1945 and 1990 did not end up Prime Minister?
It has to be well under 20%.
Good point. Can only think of Gaitskell. For unfortunate reasons. And Foot for more obvious ones. Not a single Tory. Wonder what changed? I would argue, Kinnock too was a special case, losing an election pretty comfortably he was widely expected to win. Tories under Blair really started the ditching the leader after one defeat. Or none in IDS' case.
Edit. Oops. You've covered that. So, who was the Tory leader before Hague never to be PM? 19th Century I reckon.
I don't think there was one. The modern Conservative Party started with Peel, and every leader until Hague had at least a little time in Number Ten.
BBC Three set to return as TV channel after Ofcom gives green light Service was taken off air in 2016, but corporation says some younger viewers still want linear TV
Who....I don't know a single kid who watches "linear tv". In fact, hardly any tv at all....its all YouTube, Twitch, Social Media, then Netflix....then "tv".
Comparing some of the recent peak time peak ratings to viewer-shares, not that many adults are watching linear tv either.
Other than live sport, I never watch any live telly.
Ministry of Defence has confirmed the Scottish Government has requested military assistance to deal with pressure on the ambulance service north of the border
The trick is to win the elections, not the conferences.
Dave won every general election he contested as leader.
Depending what you mean by won. Con maj 2010 was there for the taking.
Most seats/most votes counts as a victory.
The fact he became PM means it was a victory.
As this puts Dave’s achievement into context.
Somewhat remarkable Heath got to fight 1970 from those figures.
In those days - and really up until the end of Kinnock post-1987 - you got to keep fighting General Elections until you won. What proportion of Conservative and Labour leaders between 1945 and 1990 did not end up Prime Minister?
It has to be well under 20%.
Good point. Can only think of Gaitskell. For unfortunate reasons. And Foot for more obvious ones. Not a single Tory. Wonder what changed? I would argue, Kinnock too was a special case, losing an election pretty comfortably he was widely expected to win. Tories under Blair really started the ditching the leader after one defeat. Or none in IDS' case.
Edit. Oops. You've covered that. So, who was the Tory leader before Hague never to be PM? 19th Century I reckon.
I don't think there was one. The modern Conservative Party started with Peel, and every leader until Hague had at least a little time in Number Ten.
I think that's right. I'm reading through Harold Wilson's interesting biography of all previous PMs up to Macmillan (he says with decent reticence that it wouldn't be appropriate to comment on the most recent ones at the time he wrote) and I can't spot a single gap in Tory leaders not becoming PM, though some like Roseberry and Bonar Law were brief.
Ministry of Defence has confirmed the Scottish Government has requested military assistance to deal with pressure on the ambulance service north of the border
Did someone say Corbyn is expecting to be reinstated into labour
Keir Starmer announces support for AUKUS
Corbyn - Starting a new cold war will not bring peace, justice, and human rights to the world #AUKUS
Of course he never comments on China's provocations.
Arhhh but remember they are part of the "Global South" *, so escape any criticism in the weird Corbyn book of the oppressor vs opposed nations.
* one of the most ridiculous wokey terms for developing nations, as half the nations aren't even in the southern hemisphere....and loads that are, aren't included.
The trick is to win the elections, not the conferences.
Dave won every general election he contested as leader.
Depending what you mean by won. Con maj 2010 was there for the taking.
Most seats/most votes counts as a victory.
The fact he became PM means it was a victory.
As this puts Dave’s achievement into context.
Somewhat remarkable Heath got to fight 1970 from those figures.
In those days - and really up until the end of Kinnock post-1987 - you got to keep fighting General Elections until you won. What proportion of Conservative and Labour leaders between 1945 and 1990 did not end up Prime Minister?
It has to be well under 20%.
Good point. Can only think of Gaitskell. For unfortunate reasons. And Foot for more obvious ones. Not a single Tory. Wonder what changed? I would argue, Kinnock too was a special case, losing an election pretty comfortably he was widely expected to win. Tories under Blair really started the ditching the leader after one defeat. Or none in IDS' case.
Edit. Oops. You've covered that. So, who was the Tory leader before Hague never to be PM? 19th Century I reckon.
I don't think there was one. The modern Conservative Party started with Peel, and every leader until Hague had at least a little time in Number Ten.
I think that's right. I'm reading through Harold Wilson's interesting biography of all previous PMs up to Macmillan (he says with decent reticence that it wouldn't be appropriate to comment on the most recent ones at the time he wrote) and I can't spot a single gap in Tory leaders not becoming PM, though some like Roseberry and Bonar Law were brief.
Not so - Austen Chamberlain did not become PM! Also Lord Rosebery was a Liberal.
BBC Three set to return as TV channel after Ofcom gives green light Service was taken off air in 2016, but corporation says some younger viewers still want linear TV
Who....I don't know a single kid who watches "linear tv". In fact, hardly any tv at all....its all YouTube, Twitch, Social Media, then Netflix....then "tv".
Comparing some of the recent peak time peak ratings to viewer-shares, not that many adults are watching linear tv either.
Other than live sport, I never watch any live telly.
SPD and Grune and Linke still only gets to 48% though, SPD and Grune and FDP does get to 50%
I think this is an outlier for die Linke but I would be surprised if they poll less than 6% and get less than 3 constituency seats in East Berlin. I would be surprised if they got any constituency elsewhere though (like Leipzig/Dresden etc)
Assuming that FW and Sonstige(others) are not in the final shareout as they are below 5%, then 48 out of 90 will definitely be above 50%, therefore a majority.
I agree about the Linke 8% being an outlier (the other poll on the same day showed them still at 6). But as Gary and Davey say, the sPD is likely to have a choice - Greens plus FDP or Linke. I think Scholz would prefer the FDP, though that might lose some voters on the left. Probably we won't know at once as Scholz will trade off one against the other in negotiations.
On a lighter note, this is what the Greens in Germany want for a sleeper train network. It gets my vote!
Mine too. Some impossibly romantic journeys there. London to Venice. London to Barcelona. London to Naples. Wake up looking at Capri!
Edinburgh to Athens would be the ultimate but they've gotta get up and cross stations in London. Sorry about that
Yes, that's one reason why we need to build a direct link to HS2, so trains from Scotland/northern England can go direct to the continent. That said, I believe Paris suffers from the same issue (I could be wrong, I dare say the PB Train Experts will clarify).
From booking trains from Edinburgh to Avignon for my late dad, he had to change stations in both London and Paris. Might be different now, but I suspect the two countries both suffer from their capital=galactic centre symdrome and can't imagine that anyone might not automatically want to pay homage.
Certainly an issue in nations with Primate Cities. I mean, Londoners and Parisians do have a point. They are both fantastic cities. But we really do need to consider rail bypasses for both.
I'm not sure it is actually necessary to destroy Camden as Leon fears - my friend who lives there showed me once a spur running off the main line (into Euston) at the Regents Park Road bridge that headed off east and entered a tangle of tracks and viaducts in the former gas-metery wastelands north of the British Library, so there's something right there, though needing engineering at the St Pancras end. Maybe someone knows why this wasn't picked up on.
One would certainly hope there are options. There is indeed a spaghetti nest of railway lines up there. You'd think something would be possible?
Leon's 'destroy Camden' comments are just repetition of the Camden NIMBYs who were against the scheme - led in the media by a certain Stanley Johnson (I'm sure I've heard of him before?)
Besides, as SeanT Leon knows all too well, Camden has been cut through many times; the Regent's Canal, the railway in the 1850s, roads and developments - and it still manages to thrive.
In reality, the scheme was canned because it was massively expensive for very little benefit. It as a nice-to-have, not a necessity. So it was the first thing axed on the scheme.
FPT but if I may please - what was the main problem? I mean, there's already a railway almost all the way!
Josias is being glib. The plans for Camden were horrendous. A decade of enormous demolition and building, all around the central Market area, and further south and east.
Put it this way, you wouldn't want it in YOUR neighborhood
Surely not for [edit] renovating a branch line and some extra points and signals. There's somethijng missing from the equation.
No, the changes/demolitions needed were huge, and for very little benefit (as Josias has accepted)
I examined them closely at the time! It was called the Camden Spur I think? Something like that
If you look at old HS2 documents online you'll probably find them still
There were enormous benefits for the people who really matter - i.e, people from the Red Wall keen to spend time i Tuscany, and not moany Remainers in Camden.
Let's see 2-3 hours by plane from Newcastle / Manchester to Pisa or x hours on a train.
I know what I would pick most of the time, which is why those routes don't make any sense in real life.
Hours to get to airport , hours in security /queuing with same at other side, if we had a fraction of London infrastructure it would be train every time. Unfortunately funding never gets that far north.
Twenty years ago, my then-gf had a friend who worked in Edinburgh, but had to be in London twice a week. She tried the train, and it was her backup. But almost all the time she went with (I think) EasyJet. Despite calling them SleazyJet.
Me? As it was billable, I'd take the train every time.
There is little if any difference in travelling time between train and plane to London from Scotland when you count the hours spent either side of the flight just a case if you could get an early train. They have improved local trains starting much earlier to get to mainline stations. Journey always more relaxing than the stress and hassle of airport security etc etc.
That's the odd thing. She lived in Leith. I don't know the Lothian bus routes, especially at the time, but I can't see Leith to the airport being shorter than Leith to Waverley.
she would get tram nowadays but still longer to airport by a fair amount even if old bus routes.
Ministry of Defence has confirmed the Scottish Government has requested military assistance to deal with pressure on the ambulance service north of the border
They've been helping in northern England and NI (who have just asked for more) but for some reason the Scottish government either didn't think they needed help, asked people to only call if "absolutely critical" or some other factors entered into their calculations.....
Ministry of Defence has confirmed the Scottish Government has requested military assistance to deal with pressure on the ambulance service north of the border
It is Scotland unionists inflate anything to do with Scotland and always make out it is a big deal whilst ignoring 10x the disasters in England. However you knew that but wanted to add your put down to the pile.
The trick is to win the elections, not the conferences.
Dave won every general election he contested as leader.
Depending what you mean by won. Con maj 2010 was there for the taking.
Most seats/most votes counts as a victory.
The fact he became PM means it was a victory.
As this puts Dave’s achievement into context.
Somewhat remarkable Heath got to fight 1970 from those figures.
In those days - and really up until the end of Kinnock post-1987 - you got to keep fighting General Elections until you won. What proportion of Conservative and Labour leaders between 1945 and 1990 did not end up Prime Minister?
It has to be well under 20%.
Good point. Can only think of Gaitskell. For unfortunate reasons. And Foot for more obvious ones. Not a single Tory. Wonder what changed? I would argue, Kinnock too was a special case, losing an election pretty comfortably he was widely expected to win. Tories under Blair really started the ditching the leader after one defeat. Or none in IDS' case.
Edit. Oops. You've covered that. So, who was the Tory leader before Hague never to be PM? 19th Century I reckon.
I don't think there was one. The modern Conservative Party started with Peel, and every leader until Hague had at least a little time in Number Ten.
'Chamberlain returned to office in H. H. Asquith's wartime coalition government in May 1915, as Secretary of State for India, but resigned to take responsibility for the disastrous Kut Campaign. He again returned to office in David Lloyd George's coalition government, once again serving as Chancellor of the Exchequer. He then served as Conservative Party leader in the Commons (1921–2), before resigning after the Carlton Club meeting voted to end the Lloyd George Coalition.' From Wilkipedia
Ministry of Defence has confirmed the Scottish Government has requested military assistance to deal with pressure on the ambulance service north of the border
It is Scotland unionists inflate anything to do with Scotland and always make out it is a big deal whilst ignoring 10x the disasters in England. However you knew that but wanted to add your put down to the pile.
Did someone say Corbyn is expecting to be reinstated into labour
Keir Starmer announces support for AUKUS
Corbyn - Starting a new cold war will not bring peace, justice, and human rights to the world #AUKUS
Of course he never comments on China's provocations.
Arhhh but remember they are part of the "Global South" *, so escape any criticism in the weird Corbyn book of the oppressor vs opposed nations.
* one of the most ridiculous wokey terms for developing nations, as half the nations aren't even in the southern hemisphere....and loads that are, aren't included.
Is "wokey" just your general word for inexact and misleading now?
Did someone say Corbyn is expecting to be reinstated into labour
Keir Starmer announces support for AUKUS
Corbyn - Starting a new cold war will not bring peace, justice, and human rights to the world #AUKUS
Of course he never comments on China's provocations.
Arhhh but remember they are part of the "Global South" *, so escape any criticism in the weird Corbyn book of the oppressor vs opposed nations.
* one of the most ridiculous wokey terms for developing nations, as half the nations aren't even in the southern hemisphere....and loads that are, aren't included.
Is "wokey" just your general word for inexact and misleading now?
Developing world has now been deemed unacceptable and offensive by some organisations. You must use something like Global South instead, but then that is now controversial in itself among some.
The trick is to win the elections, not the conferences.
Dave won every general election he contested as leader.
Depending what you mean by won. Con maj 2010 was there for the taking.
Most seats/most votes counts as a victory.
The fact he became PM means it was a victory.
As this puts Dave’s achievement into context.
Somewhat remarkable Heath got to fight 1970 from those figures.
In those days - and really up until the end of Kinnock post-1987 - you got to keep fighting General Elections until you won. What proportion of Conservative and Labour leaders between 1945 and 1990 did not end up Prime Minister?
It has to be well under 20%.
Good point. Can only think of Gaitskell. For unfortunate reasons. And Foot for more obvious ones. Not a single Tory. Wonder what changed? I would argue, Kinnock too was a special case, losing an election pretty comfortably he was widely expected to win. Tories under Blair really started the ditching the leader after one defeat. Or none in IDS' case.
Edit. Oops. You've covered that. So, who was the Tory leader before Hague never to be PM? 19th Century I reckon.
I don't think Kinnock was expected to win the 1992 election - but to at least deprive the Tories of a majority and possibly lead the largest party .
I remember being pretty hopeful. Quite a shock, 92.
The trick is to win the elections, not the conferences.
Dave won every general election he contested as leader.
Depending what you mean by won. Con maj 2010 was there for the taking.
Most seats/most votes counts as a victory.
The fact he became PM means it was a victory.
As this puts Dave’s achievement into context.
Somewhat remarkable Heath got to fight 1970 from those figures.
In those days - and really up until the end of Kinnock post-1987 - you got to keep fighting General Elections until you won. What proportion of Conservative and Labour leaders between 1945 and 1990 did not end up Prime Minister?
It has to be well under 20%.
Good point. Can only think of Gaitskell. For unfortunate reasons. And Foot for more obvious ones. Not a single Tory. Wonder what changed? I would argue, Kinnock too was a special case, losing an election pretty comfortably he was widely expected to win. Tories under Blair really started the ditching the leader after one defeat. Or none in IDS' case.
Edit. Oops. You've covered that. So, who was the Tory leader before Hague never to be PM? 19th Century I reckon.
I don't think there was one. The modern Conservative Party started with Peel, and every leader until Hague had at least a little time in Number Ten.
He was briefly leader of the party in the Commons while Curzon led in the Lords (1921-22). Doesn't appear to be an overall leader formally during that period although Chamberlain was probably regarded effectively as number one. Bonar Law succeeded them both .
BBC Three set to return as TV channel after Ofcom gives green light Service was taken off air in 2016, but corporation says some younger viewers still want linear TV
Who....I don't know a single kid who watches "linear tv". In fact, hardly any tv at all....its all YouTube, Twitch, Social Media, then Netflix....then "tv".
My little 'un does. With a healthy amount of Youtube as well.
They must be really little. Other than LAFC games, I don't think my children have watched linear TV in five years, maybe longer.
Comments
Not in Carlisle are you; we were in and out very quickly a couple of years ago.
I think on the potential audience, there are actually two types of ‘news’. The first is the traditional reporting type and, on that, there is no room for growth - the BBC has a natural advantage given its history, reputation etc although ITV ah as given it a shot (Sky News is just boring I find).
The second is, in reality, politicised entertainment. There I think there could be, especially with a Morgan at its helm. What you would want if you are News Corp is essentially a bunch of punchy, humorous, right-wing types taking the piss out of lefties. Is there a market for that? I think so. Maybe not on @pb though
PS what about @Leon as a guest presenter?
(Speaking as a former resident of Camden).
If Camden had never existed, Ken Livingstone might never have got his big break in the late 70s.
Keep Hampstead, Highgate and Bloomsbury, and flatten everything in between.
(someone broke the quotes)
Not sure about Hampstead.
Just think how many annoying people that would remove. All those smug media types. Footballers competing for the biggest fishtank. Getting close to being a price worth paying,
Depending on how it is phased, China's application may be considered at the same time as the UK's.
China officially applies to join CPTPP.
CPTPP is the 11 country agreement that evolved from the TPP.
The TPP was the agreement the US drafted, negotiated and agreed but which never passed Congress and which President Trump pulled the US out of on his first (full) day in office.
https://twitter.com/ChadBown/status/1438513240942645255
The European Union has said that it will provide €30bn ($35.3bn; £25.6bn) over the next six years towards a new agency dealing with health preparedness and rapid response.
I once went for a clinic appointment with a particular specialist, nothing urgent but booked a week ahead. I took a large book. On arrival I was told the specialist would see me soon. I read a few chapters and after 90 minutes enquired about progress. The same receptionist said have patience, it could be a while yet. Another few chapters and another 90 minutes and I asked again, getting a different receptionist.
"Oh, Dr... hasn't come in today."
I did expostulate a little. To be fair they were apologetic and I got to see someone else 20 minutes later.
And it was a good book.
Thank you for providing these every day
I went for an appointment with my surgeon. I hobbled to the hospital on crutches.
The receptionist said: "Oh, I'm sorry, I've been trying to contact you. The Prof isn't in today. He's asked me to apologise and say he's busy. But he's actually playing golf with Ayrton Senna."
That must have been a hard choice for him. Playing golf with Ayrton Senna or staring at my ankle.
It's a real shame the US turned away from the TPP - if they'd joined, and then we'd followed, it would have been an amazing counterweight to China.
And probably more important (because of its breadth) than the new UK-US-AU partnership.
What could possibly go wrong with an artisan flint dildo crafter?
Me? As it was billable, I'd take the train every time.
...Unfortunately, for the politics of Britain.
JWExTheSpa
@SpaJw
·
2h Replying to @jimwaterson
24 hours a day of people saying on TV that they are not allowed to say on TV what they are saying TV.
Often the issue is that
a) organisations are making crazy decisions about things that they deem are unsayable / offensive, that outside some niche twitter echo-chamber nobody thinks that
and
b) the whole point is unless you are in a particular privileged or powerful position, e.g. on a tv channel that has decided they will do precisely this, you won't be able to say this stuff or be silenced. Ricky Gervais or Jimmy Carr only get away with their comedy because they are already massive and even JK Rowling had all those issues with her publisher with a big campaign to have them drop her.
There was a really revealing interview between 3 comedians I linked the other day. The one had come with the BBC to interview about this issue in comedy and she started off with all the right PC terms and the "correct" opinions etc, and by the end she had lapsed into its absolutely shit, I have to be so careful, self censor myself, its bollocks etc, realised she had and then said this won't be able to go in the BBC documentary. We only got to see it because the guys being interviewed recorded it.
(I had no idea who he was before that cancellation. As I was a young F1 fan, I was rather blown away.)
Now, I think Biden is disinterested in the TPP (and trade generally), so I don't think he's going to want to join. And I don't think Trump is going to change his mind. So, realistically, I don't think the US will join.
Which is a real shame.
Cameron managed consistent poll leads from September 2005 to June 2007. Brown managed consistent poll leads then from July 2007 with Cameron regaining consistent leads again by October. By the 2010 election Cameron had achieved polling leads for all but 3 months of his leadership. July - Sept 2007 were the only months in the 4.5 years he was opposition leader that he didn't have very consistent poll leads.
In contrast Starmer has achieved consistent poll leads: Never
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t2DA1uwVsdE&t=125
It appears that the 111 service has a different triage system
As 65+ now make up c55% of admissions in England (was 28% july ish time) that purple line key.
Starting to see it, with 17% and 12% falls in admissions compared to same day prev week.
Possibility those in hospital goes below 6000 by wkend.
https://twitter.com/ThatRyanChap/status/1438525623773712390?s=20
Though when we went to A&E when my wife had a fall (on black ice) while heavily pregnant the receptionist made a mistake on our triage which meant we weren't seen for many hours when it should have really been seen immediately. Thankfully all ended up OK but it could have been worse.
Cher Gérard, je ne crois pas que ce soit la description la plus juste de la négociation de 2013-2016. La France ne transfère pas de propulsion nucléaire, comme tu le sais bien.[Dear Gérard, I do not believe that this is the most accurate description of the 2013-2016 negotiations. France does not transfer nuclear propulsion, as you well know.]
https://twitter.com/BrunoTertrais/status/1438538625004752899?s=20
I know what you mean - that does sound great - but if I were them I wouldn't be keen on going in that direction. It's the sort of thing that works really really well in Bullingdon or raffish drinking club type settings, everyone simpatico and boozed up, the alcohol sharpening their wit and driving them on to ever more wickedly funny flights of fancy, but I don't see it translating to live TV. Lots of what might appear brilliant to the people in the studio could come across to those watching at home as crass and a bit cliched.
Service was taken off air in 2016, but corporation says some younger viewers still want linear TV
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2021/sep/16/bbc-three-return-tv-channel-ofcom
Who....I don't know a single kid who watches "linear tv". In fact, hardly any tv at all....its all YouTube, Twitch, Social Media, then Netflix....then "tv".
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/02/uk-defence-secretary-suggests-us-is-no-longer-superpower
Simply not possible to think he was not in the loop.
After that plus the NutNut alleged doggie spat Wallace must be feeling slightly relieved after the reshuffle.
https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1438541236198068228?s=20
Who?
Keir Starmer announces support for AUKUS
Corbyn - Starting a new cold war will not bring peace, justice, and human rights to the world #AUKUS
Not in the list of leaders.
https://twitter.com/SkyNewsBreak/status/1438545544859856896?s=20
Ministers will slash red list tomorrow while also removing need for PCR tests for vaccinated travellers on return to the UK
https://twitter.com/Steven_Swinford/status/1438544255069339654?s=20
* one of the most ridiculous wokey terms for developing nations, as half the nations aren't even in the southern hemisphere....and loads that are, aren't included.
https://twitter.com/HugoGye/status/1438547505713713152?s=20
From Wilkipedia
I am not adding to any pile