I know we don't necessarily want a clown as PM, but I do think the complete absence of any light notes in Starmer's prose and demeanour makes it very hard for him to capture the imagination.
If you don't have light notes, you need passionate notes.
I'm a Milibandite rather than a Corbynite, but he should, for instance, at the present political moment be summoning passion to fight the UC cut, which is politically and economically idiotic even for the Tories' prospects, let alone morally repellent.
Which means they actively managed to find a ghost writer as ball-numbingly boring as the great knight himself.
I am 99% certain he wrote it himself. It is *him*. Perhaps he then had it heavily edited by his team, to make sure they took out any stray, unexpected hints of humour, intelligence, novelty, insight, personality or political wit
No hired professional writer would ever produce something THAT boring
I would say that "feather-footed through the plashy fen passes the questing Labour activist" is the best line in it.
On J.K. Rowling for Labour leader, her previous judicious and far sighted foray into Scottish politics will set them up well for winning back Scotland.
"I’ve heard it said that ‘we’ve got to leave, because they’ll punish us if we don’t’, but my guess is that if we vote to stay, we will be in the heady position of the spouse who looked like walking out, but decided to give things one last go. All the major political parties are currently wooing us with offers of extra powers, keen to keep Scotland happy so that it does not hold an independence referendum every ten years and cause uncertainty and turmoil all over again. I doubt whether we will ever have been more popular, or in a better position to dictate terms, than if we vote to stay."
I know we don't necessarily want a clown as PM, but I do think the complete absence of any light notes in Starmer's prose and demeanour makes it very hard for him to capture the imagination.
If you don't have light notes, you need passionate notes.
I'm a Milibandite rather than a Corbynite, but he should, for instance, at the present political moment be summoning passion to fight the UC cut, which is politically and economically idiotic even for the Tories' prospects , let alone morally repellent.
But they are fighting the UC cut, tooth and nail. It's in all their tweets etc. Rayner raised it at PMQs. And they wanted a vote on it in the HoC this week but the Speaker ruled against it. What more can they do?
Does anyone think this energy crisis could bring down the government?
I think they’re gonna have to ditch the cap. Even if they don’t, it’s looking quite possible average energy bills will rise to ~£1800 from April. For many people that will be almost double.
Hard not to see some political spillover.
Especially when it clashes with the COP26 rhetoric. It’s a head on smash between the Carrie wing of the Tory party and the red wall voters.
At some point soon, it’s going to hit that climate change mitigation comes with huge costs for the average person.
I already have nightmares of driving off while the car's still plugged in - And I haven't bought one yet!
I think the looming political problem is the increased cost of motoring. A lot of people rely on old petrol cars for cheap motoring. They cost almost nothing. By way of example, the total depreciation on my last car was £1700 over 4 years. There were no other costs at all, aside from annual servicing and MOT (£150), along with Insurance and petrol, but it did 40 mpg.
New cars, including electric cars, essentially cost at least £200 per month. They don't last the way that older petrol vehicles do due to the complicated tech and particularly battery life. If old cars are taxed and regulated out of existence, that is going to be a disaster for poor people.
Let them use bikes.
Secondhand electrical cars start at about £3000 at present.
I just paid £3,500 for a 2005 Mercedes E500. With a V8 and a big boot. How much does an EV of similar size and performance cost?
Yes, its going to be a massive problem for governments, millions of people with old cars rely on them for work, and don’t have somewhere dedicated to park at home. They’re nurses and warehouse workers.
Oh, and the £40bn ish of fuel duty and road tax.
I am not an expert, but my suspicion is that EV's are designed with a 7 year design life. They are leased, rather than sold, so resale values are of less significance. The whole business model of manufacturers has changed. Beyond around 7 years they seem essentially become uneconomic to keep running so they effectively go to be recycled.
The problem with a £3000 used electric car, if one exists; it would quickly become uneconomic to repair. The contrast with a low mileage ICE vehicle is significant; the latter can keep running indefinetly if it maintained.
As someone who cycles everywhere I support a societal shift to a shift to bikes or low maintainence battery scooters, but unfortunately it isn't going to be practical for a lot of people. Long distance travel is not feasible using such vehicles. And it poses the question of why can't the rich also make such a shift; after all a 1.5 ton lump of metal with a huge battery that only lasts for 7 years also has quite significant environmental consequences.
There are certainly old (2013) Teslas being written off with battery issues, and a replacement is £20k or thereabouts. There’s also stories of them being used as taxis and running up 300,000 miles. Both of these can of course be true, and it may be that age is more of a factor than mileage in determining vehicle life.
We’ll find out in the next few years!
Since there's much fewer moving parts (I believe) it could possibly even be that it's better suited for more mileage than less.
Ie if it's constantly moving like a taxi then it stays operational but if it's idle on the driveway days at a time then it's less so.
Not saying it's the case but it's a possibility.
The issue is with the battery itself, that degrades over time, as opposed to mileage like an engine.
Lots of unknowns, it may be that the new generation of EVs are a lot better in six or seven years’ time, than six and seven year old EVs are today.
In fact, it’s almost certainly the case, the question is that of degree.
It will depend on the battery chemistry. That currently being adopted for the cheaper end of the market (LFP) is likely to last considerably longer than some of the energy denser chemistries (also the mainstay of lithium battery bulk storage).
I know we don't necessarily want a clown as PM, but I do think the complete absence of any light notes in Starmer's prose and demeanour makes it very hard for him to capture the imagination.
If you don't have light notes, you need passionate notes.
I'm a Milibandite rather than a Corbynite, but he should, for instance, at the present political moment be summoning passion to fight the UC cut, which is politically and economically idiotic even for the Tories' prospects , let alone morally repellent.
But they are fighting the UC cut, tooth and nail. It's in all their tweets etc. Rayner raised it at PMQs. And they wanted a vote on it in the HoC this week but the Speaker ruled against it. What more can they do?
Spot on. Keep on tweeting - the red wall is all ears. Twitter is where it's at .....
Ok, I've read the Foreword and it's excellent. Anybody saying otherwise either hasn't read it or is commenting in bad faith. It hits the right notes - in the right order - and it pushes the right buttons. In particular it stresses exactly what I would stress, viz:
- The Tories have been in for ages and have failed. FAILED. - They're all talk and no action. Dirty talk it is too. - Covid exposed what an unequal country we are and what overstretched public services we have. - All of this due to Tory neglect and vandalism. - So many people in Britain feel insecure. INSECURE. - They deserve better. We all do quite frankly. - It's time for a change. Labour has changed. It's time for Labour.
This bit, in particular, hits hard and cuts through:
"Covid-19 has also exposed the many fragilities in the ways we live, work and are governed. Inequality of opportunity and a lack of security are not inevitable - they are a result of a decade of Tory government that stripped back the state and left our country’s foundations weakened when the virus struck.
"Security" again, see? And "inequality" but carefully caveated with "of opportunity" so as not to frighten the skittish horses of Middle England. I also like the buzzphrase, the Contribution Society. Unlike the clear nonsense of Cameron's "Big Society" and Johnson's "Levelling Up" this one means something and you can easily imagine actual policies to prove that it does.
It really is a terrific Foreword. Literally my only quibble - and it is a quibble - is with the following:
"Our country is now at a crossroads. Down one path is the same old insecurity and lack of opportunity. But down the Labour one is something better: a society built on everyone’s contribution."
That is not a "crossroads" (which has 3 options), it's a "fork in the road".
But anyway, far as I'm concerned, just based on the Foreword, it's so far so good. More than good.
On we go.
Contribution Society? Is he heading to better more contribution based benefit system, which could (like I think the Dutch do), create a kind of security around the very precarious job market of modern capitalism.
Ok, I've read the Foreword and it's excellent. Anybody saying otherwise either hasn't read it or is commenting in bad faith. It hits the right notes - in the right order - and it pushes the right buttons. In particular it stresses exactly what I would stress, viz:
- The Tories have been in for ages and have failed. FAILED. - They're all talk and no action. Dirty talk it is too. - Covid exposed what an unequal country we are and what overstretched public services we have. - All of this due to Tory neglect and vandalism. - So many people in Britain feel insecure. INSECURE. - They deserve better. We all do quite frankly. - It's time for a change. Labour has changed. It's time for Labour.
This bit, in particular, hits hard and cuts through:
"Covid-19 has also exposed the many fragilities in the ways we live, work and are governed. Inequality of opportunity and a lack of security are not inevitable - they are a result of a decade of Tory government that stripped back the state and left our country’s foundations weakened when the virus struck.
"Security" again, see? And "inequality" but carefully caveated with "of opportunity" so as not to frighten the skittish horses of Middle England. I also like the buzzphrase, the Contribution Society. Unlike the clear nonsense of Cameron's "Big Society" and Johnson's "Levelling Up" this one means something and you can easily imagine actual policies to prove that it does.
It really is a terrific Foreword. Literally my only quibble - and it is a quibble - is with the following:
"Our country is now at a crossroads. Down one path is the same old insecurity and lack of opportunity. But down the Labour one is something better: a society built on everyone’s contribution."
That is not a "crossroads" (which has 3 options), it's a "fork in the road".
But anyway, far as I'm concerned, just based on the Foreword, it's so far so good. More than good.
On we go.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
Your best comic riff yet, or maybe your first? Anyway: VG
Does anyone think this energy crisis could bring down the government?
I think they’re gonna have to ditch the cap. Even if they don’t, it’s looking quite possible average energy bills will rise to ~£1800 from April. For many people that will be almost double.
Hard not to see some political spillover.
Especially when it clashes with the COP26 rhetoric. It’s a head on smash between the Carrie wing of the Tory party and the red wall voters.
At some point soon, it’s going to hit that climate change mitigation comes with huge costs for the average person.
I already have nightmares of driving off while the car's still plugged in - And I haven't bought one yet!
I think the looming political problem is the increased cost of motoring. A lot of people rely on old petrol cars for cheap motoring. They cost almost nothing. By way of example, the total depreciation on my last car was £1700 over 4 years. There were no other costs at all, aside from annual servicing and MOT (£150), along with Insurance and petrol, but it did 40 mpg.
New cars, including electric cars, essentially cost at least £200 per month. They don't last the way that older petrol vehicles do due to the complicated tech and particularly battery life. If old cars are taxed and regulated out of existence, that is going to be a disaster for poor people.
Let them use bikes.
One of those e-scooters would be perfect for my 3-4 mile commute. I even wanted one before covid hit but my wife said no as it wasnt legal.
I think that needs changing. I can ride a pedal bike faster than their maximum speed.
Now they are saying we only need to work 20% of time in the office so the bus is fine for that.
I'm all for electric scooters being banned, or at least regulated. The way kids ride them around here is fairly shocking; far faster than the kids on bikes, and on and off the pavement, down the middle of the road, etc.
In Milton a week or so ago, I saw a couple of lads on a scooter. Wearing dark clothes, in the dark, obviously pi**ed out their minds, weaving all around the road.
Ok. Maybe make them only legal once you have passed your driving test. And get points on your license if you break the rules on them.
There was a case a few weeks ago of someone who got banned from driving, for being drunk in charge of an unregistered electric scooter.
I note the Bank of England has shifted a little more hawkish.
Markets now expect a first rise in rates in February and another in November 2022 - bringing us to the giddy heights of 0.5%.
Where the public will start to notice is if this is insufficient to bring inflation down and rates have to rise much higher than that. Then people will really start to feel it in their mortgage payments.
Remember interest rates have only been above 0.5% for 18 months (up to 0.75%) in the last 13 years.
I know we don't necessarily want a clown as PM, but I do think the complete absence of any light notes in Starmer's prose and demeanour makes it very hard for him to capture the imagination.
If you don't have light notes, you need passionate notes.
I'm a Milibandite rather than a Corbynite, but he should, for instance, at the present political moment be summoning passion to fight the UC cut, which is politically and economically idiotic even for the Tories' prospects , let alone morally repellent.
But they are fighting the UC cut, tooth and nail. It's in all their tweets etc. Rayner raised it at PMQs. And they wanted a vote on it in the HoC this week but the Speaker ruled against it. What more can they do?
Rayner was more effective on it yesterday than Starmer has been in four months, though. That's the sort of keystone issue that concerns me. He should have a little longer time to prove himself, but I'm concerned that his range of advice is just much too narrow so far, for a start.
He needs to assemble a new coalition, not an old one, of either Blair or Corbyn vintage, and he needs to show pretty soon now that he has the skills to do that.
1. What does Starmer stand for? He needs to set out a vision, not specific policies this early, but a vision of where he wants to take the country. 2. 14,000 words? I can't be bothered to read that, far too long. We need a 3-word vision, like Get Brexit Undone or something. 3. I've read it, and I don't like Starmer's vision. Why did he waste his time writing it? 4. What's the point of Starmer? He has nothing to say. 5. It's about time Starmer set out a vision for the future of the country. 6. Mind you, I'd never vote for him anyway, because I'm a Tory.
But by all accounts there's nothing said in the 14,000 words. Even if there is, who the hell has got time to read it. My master's thesis was only about 25k words and that was a culmination of 4 years of university.
If you can't see that 14,000 words is excessive then it's you that has got the issue, not us. I've got an open mind for Labour, but not enough to waste my time reading 14,000 words of what appears to be a long winded way of saying nothing at all.
He is writing for the Fabian Society, to be fair, not The Sun. People who are into things like the FS probably don't mind reading 14,000 words. When it comes to addressing the public at large he will obviously be more direct.
A very fair point Isam. Not something I have written before, I don't suppose...now on to your charisma quotient thesis.
I don't think it is a positive thing that charisma plays a bigger part than intellectual rigourt in electing PM's, I just think it probably does. I spent ages arguing Brown was more suited to PM than Cameron, but ultimately you have to recognise the way things work
Does anyone think this energy crisis could bring down the government?
I think they’re gonna have to ditch the cap. Even if they don’t, it’s looking quite possible average energy bills will rise to ~£1800 from April. For many people that will be almost double.
Hard not to see some political spillover.
Especially when it clashes with the COP26 rhetoric. It’s a head on smash between the Carrie wing of the Tory party and the red wall voters.
At some point soon, it’s going to hit that climate change mitigation comes with huge costs for the average person.
I already have nightmares of driving off while the car's still plugged in - And I haven't bought one yet!
I think the looming political problem is the increased cost of motoring. A lot of people rely on old petrol cars for cheap motoring. They cost almost nothing. By way of example, the total depreciation on my last car was £1700 over 4 years. There were no other costs at all, aside from annual servicing and MOT (£150), along with Insurance and petrol, but it did 40 mpg.
New cars, including electric cars, essentially cost at least £200 per month. They don't last the way that older petrol vehicles do due to the complicated tech and particularly battery life. If old cars are taxed and regulated out of existence, that is going to be a disaster for poor people.
Let them use bikes.
Secondhand electrical cars start at about £3000 at present.
Plus another £5000 for the new batteries you will need to drive it off the forecourt.
Yep, cheapo second (or third etc) hand electric cars are not really viable at the moment.
But if we have new ICEs potentially until 2030 or so, then cheapo second hand electric cars won't be needed until the late 2030s (as there will still be plenty of cheapo second hand ICEs).
If ICEs disappear sooner, then it will be because the electric tech has come on more quickly and there will then be cheapo second hand electrics that are viable earlier than late 2030s too.
And, the 2030 ban doesn't apply to hybrids, I think? So worst case, if there are still issues by then you buy, in late 2030s, a ropey old hybrid with a useless battery and drive it as an ICE (although given the batteries in hybrids are much smaller, probably no big cost to replace those anyway).
TLDR: Electrics will only replace ICEs when they're a better all-round option, including in the second hand market (ohterwise people will baulk at the depreciation).
As you suggest hybrid ICE is a waste of time. I was all set on a 2018 Mercedes c300h (PHEV) earlier in the year. MB reckoned 30 mile battery range, owner reviews said 20 was wildly optimistic. Instead I got a 2019 BMW 320d ED which is giving me a phenomenal 60mpg average.
That depends quite heavily on journey mix.
If you can charge at home and do a lot of your journeys electrically it makes sense.
Also obvs 4x4 suits anyone living in the sticks.
Personally I am on a big estate which will tow 2 tons, and cost me 26k new (reduced from 36k) for a Euro 6 diesel, and does 60mpg too. The plan is to keep it as my last ICE car, except for a low mileage lightweight fun wagon.
I need an electric that will also tow 2 tons. Not here yet, except for vanity prices.
Towing with an EV is a nightmare. As you know, towing 2 tons roughly cuts your range in half, which isn’t a problem if it takes five minutes to refill the tank…
That's a rubbish take because most Pharma in the UK pay well below the headline rate due to stuff like Patent Box. Ireland actually does have a reasonably good pharma industry and I expect AZ would have a multi-year recruitment issue in the UK even with skilled visas. The cost of keeping someone employed will be about double in the UK vs Ireland and they don't need to build a skills base from scratch there.
Pharma manufacturing is usually not that hard, once initial ramp up has been done.
For sure, and that definitely feeds into the decision of why hire £70k per year chemical engineers in the UK when €40k ones in Ireland can do it.
I can't imagine the pay difference is that much...
1. What does Starmer stand for? He needs to set out a vision, not specific policies this early, but a vision of where he wants to take the country. 2. 14,000 words? I can't be bothered to read that, far too long. We need a 3-word vision, like Get Brexit Undone or something. 3. I've read it, and I don't like Starmer's vision. Why did he waste his time writing it? 4. What's the point of Starmer? He has nothing to say. 5. It's about time Starmer set out a vision for the future of the country. 6. Mind you, I'd never vote for him anyway, because I'm a Tory.
But by all accounts there's nothing said in the 14,000 words. Even if there is, who the hell has got time to read it. My master's thesis was only about 25k words and that was a culmination of 4 years of university.
If you can't see that 14,000 words is excessive then it's you that has got the issue, not us. I've got an open mind for Labour, but not enough to waste my time reading 14,000 words of what appears to be a long winded way of saying nothing at all.
He is writing for the Fabian Society, to be fair, not The Sun. People who are into things like the FS probably don't mind reading 14,000 words. When it comes to addressing the public at large he will obviously be more direct.
A very fair point Isam. Not something I have written before, I don't suppose...now on to your charisma quotient thesis.
I don't think it is a positive thing that charisma plays a bigger part than intellectual rigourt in electing PM's, I just think it probably does. I spent ages arguing Brown was more suited to PM than Cameron, but ultimately you have to recognise the way things work
Me neither. But Keir has nothing to say, either.
Brown (though nobody on this board wants to hear this) had real intellectual heft. More than those so-called wonks, the Milibands.
1. What does Starmer stand for? He needs to set out a vision, not specific policies this early, but a vision of where he wants to take the country. 2. 14,000 words? I can't be bothered to read that, far too long. We need a 3-word vision, like Get Brexit Undone or something. 3. I've read it, and I don't like Starmer's vision. Why did he waste his time writing it? 4. What's the point of Starmer? He has nothing to say. 5. It's about time Starmer set out a vision for the future of the country. 6. Mind you, I'd never vote for him anyway, because I'm a Tory.
But by all accounts there's nothing said in the 14,000 words. Even if there is, who the hell has got time to read it. My master's thesis was only about 25k words and that was a culmination of 4 years of university.
If you can't see that 14,000 words is excessive then it's you that has got the issue, not us. I've got an open mind for Labour, but not enough to waste my time reading 14,000 words of what appears to be a long winded way of saying nothing at all.
He is writing for the Fabian Society, to be fair, not The Sun. People who are into things like the FS probably don't mind reading 14,000 words. When it comes to addressing the public at large he will obviously be more direct.
A very fair point Isam. Not something I have written before, I don't suppose...now on to your charisma quotient thesis.
I don't think it is a positive thing that charisma plays a bigger part than intellectual rigourt in electing PM's, I just think it probably does. I spent ages arguing Brown was more suited to PM than Cameron, but ultimately you have to recognise the way things work
Brown is/was the most wildly unsuitable PM that it's possible to imagine. The man is an absolute clown.
Let’s just say that @kinabalu upthread should not give up the day job for literary criticism.
It feels like a piece of ad copy that an ill-organised client group have smothered to death.
I have to agree, so far.
He references ten principles which do no re-surface until the end and many are a bit 'meh'
"The government should treat taxpayer money as if it were its own." is part of one. Eh? The government should treat taxpayer money as if it belongs to the taxpayer, I'd say, and demonstrate that it's done something valuable with it or, failing that, give it back. I know what it's trying to say, but it is clumsy.
Goodness no, Rayner is at best Kinnock without the brains at worst a less appealing Corbyn.
She would also see far more tactical votes for the Tories to keep her out than Starmer would.
If however Labour want to appeal to the redwall again then Burnham is a better choice
I agree. (Though Raynor is articulate, according to Mike.)
Like Mike I rate Starmer higher than most people on PB. I'm not sure in these circs that anyone else could achieve more cut-through TBH. Is he being treated fairly?
TBF, it's usually a bit more complicated than that. (Speaking as an ex-CFO), the best way to minimise your tax bill is to - as much as possible - make sure you have similar costs and revenues in each jurisdiction. Because if you can do that, then the tax rate doesn't matter so much - because you're declaring zero profit.
AstraZeneca already has lots of costs in the UK, specifically lots of R&D work. If they put more costs into the UK, it might tip their UK operations into loss, which wouldn't do them any good at all.
It's a specialist manufacturing plant, which ought to be profitable.
1. What does Starmer stand for? He needs to set out a vision, not specific policies this early, but a vision of where he wants to take the country. 2. 14,000 words? I can't be bothered to read that, far too long. We need a 3-word vision, like Get Brexit Undone or something. 3. I've read it, and I don't like Starmer's vision. Why did he waste his time writing it? 4. What's the point of Starmer? He has nothing to say. 5. It's about time Starmer set out a vision for the future of the country. 6. Mind you, I'd never vote for him anyway, because I'm a Tory.
But by all accounts there's nothing said in the 14,000 words. Even if there is, who the hell has got time to read it. My master's thesis was only about 25k words and that was a culmination of 4 years of university.
If you can't see that 14,000 words is excessive then it's you that has got the issue, not us. I've got an open mind for Labour, but not enough to waste my time reading 14,000 words of what appears to be a long winded way of saying nothing at all.
He is writing for the Fabian Society, to be fair, not The Sun. People who are into things like the FS probably don't mind reading 14,000 words. When it comes to addressing the public at large he will obviously be more direct.
A very fair point Isam. Not something I have written before, I don't suppose...now on to your charisma quotient thesis.
I don't think it is a positive thing that charisma plays a bigger part than intellectual rigourt in electing PM's, I just think it probably does. I spent ages arguing Brown was more suited to PM than Cameron, but ultimately you have to recognise the way things work
One of the nice things about PB is the range of people that you can agree with and disagree with on different issues. Either that or I'm just some mushy centrist who agrees with everyone... So, I don't that often agree with isam, I think, but I agree with this and the previous point.
I'm guessing this film (if it ever comes to pass) will not be a moving tribute to the personal struggles of the Biden family.
I saw a total sick-bucket of a twitter exchange the other day:
Lozza (for it was he) to Neil Oliver (for it was he too): "We're going to need you this winter."
(to stand for freedom in the face of ... well in the face of something)
Oliver: "I'LL BE THERE."
Slight vomity taste in the back of my mouth just reading that. It's odd how so many of these clear eyed, tough guys of the right take a break from cutting through woke bs by engaging in these clinches with each other. The idea that they're part of some heroic, persecuted band is very strong juice for them.
Let’s just say that @kinabalu upthread should not give up the day job for literary criticism.
It feels like a piece of ad copy that an ill-organised client group have smothered to death.
I have to agree, so far.
He references ten principles which do no re-surface until the end and many are a bit 'meh'
"The government should treat taxpayer money as if it were its own." is part of one. Eh? The government should treat taxpayer money as if it belongs to the taxpayer, I'd say, and demonstrate that it's done something valuable with it or, failing that, give it back. I know what it's trying to say, but it is clumsy.
On the narrow point of the sentence above - I'd prefer it very much is the government treated taxpayer money as though it was the taxpayers'. I thought that was a very weird thing to say.
One of the very few things I like(d) about Boris is that the London Plan, which I think is a statutory requirement of the Mayor, was very clearly edited by Boris.
Was actually a good read.
Even if you don’t like the guy’s politics, he does write well.
Boris wouldn’t have written 14,000 words of nothing, when 1,500 words of nothing would have been both easier to write and better to read.
1. What does Starmer stand for? He needs to set out a vision, not specific policies this early, but a vision of where he wants to take the country. 2. 14,000 words? I can't be bothered to read that, far too long. We need a 3-word vision, like Get Brexit Undone or something. 3. I've read it, and I don't like Starmer's vision. Why did he waste his time writing it? 4. What's the point of Starmer? He has nothing to say. 5. It's about time Starmer set out a vision for the future of the country. 6. Mind you, I'd never vote for him anyway, because I'm a Tory.
But by all accounts there's nothing said in the 14,000 words. Even if there is, who the hell has got time to read it. My master's thesis was only about 25k words and that was a culmination of 4 years of university.
If you can't see that 14,000 words is excessive then it's you that has got the issue, not us. I've got an open mind for Labour, but not enough to waste my time reading 14,000 words of what appears to be a long winded way of saying nothing at all.
He is writing for the Fabian Society, to be fair, not The Sun. People who are into things like the FS probably don't mind reading 14,000 words. When it comes to addressing the public at large he will obviously be more direct.
A very fair point Isam. Not something I have written before, I don't suppose...now on to your charisma quotient thesis.
I don't think it is a positive thing that charisma plays a bigger part than intellectual rigourt in electing PM's, I just think it probably does. I spent ages arguing Brown was more suited to PM than Cameron, but ultimately you have to recognise the way things work
Brown is/was the most wildly unsuitable PM that it's possible to imagine. The man is an absolute clown.
Cameron on the other hand was a really good PM.
To be fair I was just a Labour fan then, as if they were a football team I’d support through thick and thin
Let’s just say that @kinabalu upthread should not give up the day job for literary criticism.
It feels like a piece of ad copy that an ill-organised client group have smothered to death.
I have to agree, so far.
He references ten principles which do no re-surface until the end and many are a bit 'meh'
"The government should treat taxpayer money as if it were its own." is part of one. Eh? The government should treat taxpayer money as if it belongs to the taxpayer, I'd say, and demonstrate that it's done something valuable with it or, failing that, give it back. I know what it's trying to say, but it is clumsy.
On the narrow point of the sentence above - I'd prefer it very much is the government treated taxpayer money as though it was the taxpayers'. I thought that was a very weird thing to say.
Yes, I’m more careful with other peoples money than my own! That is a strange thing to say - it implies a bad personality trait on the/his government
Unfortunately for Rayner I think a Northern woman with a tendency to being aggressive in PMQs would play into a classist-sexist stereotype that would go down badly with the public.
Strictly speaking, all of that applied to Margaret Thatcher as well.
The only difference was she lost the accent.
Grantham is in the East Midlands.
North from my point of view - clearly above Birmingham and the Severn-Wash line!
Lincolnshire is the only county which in part feels northern, midland and southern.
Scunthorpe and Grimsby: clearly northern. The names, most of all. Uncompromisingly viking. And the accents. And the nearest big cities - Leeds and Sheffield. A Yorkshireman would quibble, of course, but they'd quibble with everything. And all northerners think the north starts 10 miles south of where they were born. Lincoln, Grantham and Skegness: clearly midland. In the outer orbit of Nottingham and Leicester. And again, the accents: midlands. Stamford: the south. In the far edges of London commuterland. And you could be in the Cotswolds if it wasn't so flat.
Also, Holbeach: clearly East Anglia.
Lincoln itself - the city - is very hard to define. It's quite far north but in places it feels distinctly southern; it's quite far east but doesn't really feel "East Anglian"
The long walk up to the cathedral on a scented, drizzly dusk in midwinter is sublime, creepy and poetic
The River Witham below Lincoln Cathedral flows through a gap in the Lincolnshire Limestone created during the ice age.
East of this gap was a huge glacial lake which eventually became the Fens, North West of the gap was another glacial lake which filled the Vale of York, and South West of the gap was the Trent, which drains most of what we now call the East Midlands.
So if you go far enough back, Lincoln is literally the meeting point of North, East and Midlands.
It is interesting how these divisions persist based on a long lost landscape.
Fascinating!
One reason Lincoln feels southern is the hill, and the lushness of that river, which makes it all feel more like somewhere in Dorset or Somerset or Herefordshire
I love the sensory borders we have in this country and others. Herefordshire and the marches are a good example: Herefordshire is clearly Southern. So, just about, is South Shropshire up to Clun and Ludlow. Beyond that though and it becomes very obviously the Midlands, including the climate, the deep red bricks and the industry.
Then somewhere halfway across Hampshire, Berkshire and Oxfordshire we very noticeably transition from the South East to the West Country. The accent changes, the countryside and place names too, and the weather becomes softer.
My favourites though are in France as you drive down the autoroutes. At Laon we lose the Flemish air of Pas de Calais and are clearly in proper France, then at Troyes the building stones change, the forests start and we're in Central France. At Macon another sensory border as the steep pitched roofs give way to Roman canal tiles and cypresses and swimming pools start to appear - we are in the Southern half of the country, just like when you drive through the Vendee into Charente. Finally, just South of Montelimar the midi starts abruptly, literally one ridge and the climate and vegetation are Mediterranean. That must be one of the most abrupt and comprehensive changes within one country.
Yes, so true, I am mildly obsessed with borders, regional, national, cultural
I love trying to spot, somewhere south of Lyon, where it is that you suddenly hit Provence and the Midi sun. It is an abrupt change, as you say
Another one is the transition to the Scottish Highlands from the Lowlands.
One of my faves is the shift from German middle Europe to Italian southern Europe about 30 miles south of the Brenner Pass
The precise place south of Lyon is officially the Donzere river gorge, just south of Montelimar. Partly climate but also a change in geology. The dominant forest species South of the gorge is Holm Oak.
Brilliant! Typical French Cartesian precision
I guess it must also depend on the approach you take.
I recently experienced another European shift when I got the train between Lucerne and Locarno. In Lucerne it was mild, cloudy, mountainous, German, then you go into that massive train tunnel at Gothard, and you emerge into sun, palm trees, pizzerias, campaniles and everyone speaks Italian
Going through that tunnel is like being reincarnated
The Scottish Highlands one is again geology - this time a fault line on the north side of an ancient rift valley. Dunsinane Hill (yes, that one) or the nearby King's Seat not far from Perth has a great perspective of it on a clear day, particularly after the first winter snows.
I find tunnels are very much like that, too. A portal to a new dimension. Sadly there are few in the UK with the same impact. Leaving urban Sheffield and reappearing in the Peak District, perhaps?
Let’s just say that @kinabalu upthread should not give up the day job for literary criticism.
It feels like a piece of ad copy that an ill-organised client group have smothered to death.
I have to agree, so far.
He references ten principles which do no re-surface until the end and many are a bit 'meh'
"The government should treat taxpayer money as if it were its own." is part of one. Eh? The government should treat taxpayer money as if it belongs to the taxpayer, I'd say, and demonstrate that it's done something valuable with it or, failing that, give it back. I know what it's trying to say, but it is clumsy.
On the narrow point of the sentence above - I'd prefer it very much is the government treated taxpayer money as though it was the taxpayers'. I thought that was a very weird thing to say.
Yes, I’m more careful with other peoples money than my own! That is a strange thing to say - it implies a bad personality trait on the/his government
I doubt many will read it, and thus it doesn't matter really, but it is a weird thing to say. (I'm sure he intended to make a smaller government point but inadvertently made a big government (and ugly) point)
"Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 I’ve been repeatedly briefed that some of Starmer’s current and former aides have given up on his prospects and are now pinning their hopes on Wes Streeting, who they hope can be made Labour leader via the electoral college"
I know we don't necessarily want a clown as PM, but I do think the complete absence of any light notes in Starmer's prose and demeanour makes it very hard for him to capture the imagination.
If you don't have light notes, you need passionate notes.
I'm a Milibandite rather than a Corbynite, but he should, for instance, at the present political moment be summoning passion to fight the UC cut, which is politically and economically idiotic even for the Tories' prospects , let alone morally repellent.
But they are fighting the UC cut, tooth and nail. It's in all their tweets etc. Rayner raised it at PMQs. And they wanted a vote on it in the HoC this week but the Speaker ruled against it. What more can they do?
Spot on. Keep on tweeting - the red wall is all ears. Twitter is where it's at .....
Felix, you are such a tory tart. The more extreme woke stuff is pretty much a Twitter thing too, but with that you like to make out it represents what the Labour Party is all about.
"Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 I’ve been repeatedly briefed that some of Starmer’s current and former aides have given up on his prospects and are now pinning their hopes on Wes Streeting, who they hope can be made Labour leader via the electoral college"
"Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 I’ve been repeatedly briefed that some of Starmer’s current and former aides have given up on his prospects and are now pinning their hopes on Wes Streeting, who they hope can be made Labour leader via the electoral college"
The bizarre thing is that we *are* at a fork in the road. Or let’s say, a change in the tides.
2021 is as pivotal a year as 1989, or 1945.
What country do we want to build?
Not Boris’s. Nor Keir’s by the look of it.
We are indeed. One of things that concerns me is that I think figures like Mandelson are far, far from the kind of individuals to take advantage of it, and "catch the tide in the affairs of men", wasn't the quote .
It doesn't need to be figures exclusively from further left, or automatically from the party's further reaches of the right, but it does need genuine vision and some completely untried ideas, probably eclectically taking from both wings.
Goodness no, Rayner is at best Kinnock without the brains at worst a less appealing Corbyn.
She would also see far more tactical votes for the Tories to keep her out than Starmer would.
If however Labour want to appeal to the redwall again then Burnham is a better choice
I agree. (Though Raynor is articulate, according to Mike.)
Like Mike I rate Starmer higher than most people on PB. I'm not sure in these circs that anyone else could achieve more cut-through TBH. Is he being treated fairly?
To quote the great articulate herself, anyone shaking head at her style is a prat.
The bizarre thing is that we *are* at a fork in the road. Or let’s say, a change in the tides.
2021 is as pivotal a year as 1989, or 1945.
What country do we want to build?
Not Boris’s. Nor Keir’s by the look of it.
So we'll just let it fall apart then ? it is a crossroads, not a fork...
And the road is ahead, so no turning left or right.
Keep right on to the end of the road Keep right on to the end Tho' the way be long, let your heart be strong Keep right on to the end Tho' you're tired and weary still journey on, Till you come to your happy abode
"Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 I’ve been repeatedly briefed that some of Starmer’s current and former aides have given up on his prospects and are now pinning their hopes on Wes Streeting, who they hope can be made Labour leader via the electoral college"
One of the very few things I like(d) about Boris is that the London Plan, which I think is a statutory requirement of the Mayor, was very clearly edited by Boris.
Was actually a good read.
Even if you don’t like the guy’s politics, he does write well.
Boris wouldn’t have written 14,000 words of nothing, when 1,500 words of nothing would have been both easier to write and better to read.
Sadly the Labour cupboard is bare. Keir (bar Ed Milliband) is just about the best the Labour party has got. Andy/Nandy like Sadiq is not the answer - all lightweights.
The next GE is still up for grabs so let's not write off Labour's chances just yet. Lots of water to flow under the bridge.
Let’s just say that @kinabalu upthread should not give up the day job for literary criticism.
It feels like a piece of ad copy that an ill-organised client group have smothered to death.
I have to agree, so far.
He references ten principles which do no re-surface until the end and many are a bit 'meh'
"The government should treat taxpayer money as if it were its own." is part of one. Eh? The government should treat taxpayer money as if it belongs to the taxpayer, I'd say, and demonstrate that it's done something valuable with it or, failing that, give it back. I know what it's trying to say, but it is clumsy.
I think that's nitpicking of the same order as my objection to "crossroads". Treat the money "like it's your own" is something nobody will misunderstand. It's powerful and does 2 things at once. It reassures about Labour spending like a drunken sailor - bollocks but widely believed bollocks that has to be nailed. Ouch. And it speaks to the Tories' largesse to their rich mates, the corruption and venality they're famous for.
Edit: hat tip TUD for spotting the "crossroads" linguistic flaw even before I did.
Sadly the Labour cupboard is bare. Keir (bar Ed Milliband) is just about the best the Labour party has got. Andy/Nandy like Sadiq is not the answer - all lightweights.
The next GE is still up for grabs so let's not write off Labour's chances just yet. Lots of water to flow under the bridge.
To be fair, if the answer is Boris Johnson it must be a very, very silly question.
Which means they actively managed to find a ghost writer as ball-numbingly boring as the great knight himself.
He probably did write it himself, or 99% of it.
There's a saying in business that, when the CEO goes off and writes a book, it's a sure sign they've taken their eye off the ball and things are about to take an unexpected turn.
Terrible report on the dreadful state of Wales NHS on ITV Wales tonight, with worst ever A&E waiting times, biggest waiting list on record and second slowest ever ambulance response times
Let’s just say that @kinabalu upthread should not give up the day job for literary criticism.
It feels like a piece of ad copy that an ill-organised client group have smothered to death.
I have to agree, so far.
He references ten principles which do no re-surface until the end and many are a bit 'meh'
"The government should treat taxpayer money as if it were its own." is part of one. Eh? The government should treat taxpayer money as if it belongs to the taxpayer, I'd say, and demonstrate that it's done something valuable with it or, failing that, give it back. I know what it's trying to say, but it is clumsy.
I think that's nitpicking of the same order as my objection to "crossroads". Treat the money "like it's your own" is something nobody will misunderstand. It's powerful and does 2 things at once. It reassures about Labour spending like a drunken sailor - bollocks but widely believed bollocks that has to be nailed. Ouch. And it speaks to the Tories' largesse to their rich mates, the corruption and venality they're famous for.
Edit: hat tip TUD for spotting the "crossroads" linguistic flaw even before I did.
Maybe, but a foolish slip. I know this is just a Fabian paper, but it opens the "look what happened last time a Labour government treated your money like its own" attack line. There are far better ways to put hte same idea.
For all my sniping though, I agree with Murali below, Starmer may still be the best choice right now and he may still win
"Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 I’ve been repeatedly briefed that some of Starmer’s current and former aides have given up on his prospects and are now pinning their hopes on Wes Streeting, who they hope can be made Labour leader via the electoral college"
Are Labour really so biased towards Londom MPs that they have to resort to someone that comes across as soft and wet as Wes Streeting? He's hardly the sort of person you'd want to follow into battle, is he?
Others have already had a go, so might as well – The Road Ahead. I welcome the effort, whatever the reception.
Title and contents Keir Starmer MP, but not the Rt Hon. Sir Keir Starmer MP? Image has trees, a couple, young people and at least one old person including walking stick – so inclusive. Sections are hyperlinked in the document – I cannot tell you how rare this is. Most manifestoes did not do this, or only had one or two then gave up.
Foreword Harmless fluff, as you’d expect from a foreword, but makes sure to highlight workers, education, health, climate change, and the standard ‘give decisions to local communities’, even if the latter is always talked about and never done.
Section 1 – Reflections I think his point about the ‘complicated, sometimes contradictory way people are feeling’ is a good one.
Not overdoing the Conservative bashing as screeds sometimes do, not yet anyway, but brining it in to complement a point about damaging moments.
Pandemic change the way we work yadda yadda.
Bit of personal background, he has a decent story to tell. Interesting he makes sure to mention how proud his parents were that he was given a knighthood.
‘Does a working class child in Britain today have the same opportunity [Keir’s] generation did? It’s hard to think they do’. It may be a cliché point, but it’s the sort of thing he should push hard.
He wants Labour to be Britain’s ‘Bricks and mortar’. Not sure how well that metaphor works, but kudos for trying.
Section 2– Past Quote from Cameron – cheeky. Reference to glory days of 1945, should stir some member love.
Not sure mentioning navel gazing in a 12000 word personal reflection is sensible, but well done to him for tackling head on that the party has harmed itself through its contesting the legacy of the 1997 Labour government (not the ‘Blair government’? He mentions him on the next page)
I wasn’t aware Cameron and Osborne were libertarians, but it says so here. But again, interesting that he tackles the adaptability of the Tories from the view of how it makes them hard to pin down, when Labour hinders itself, and not from a position of simple condemnation.
Makes sure to lump Scottish nationalists in with Conservatives around embracing or ignoring extremism et al.
‘The desire of people across the country to have real power and control – expressed most forcibly in the Brexit vote – remains unmet’. Er, what? I know he has moved on, but that is a bold point.
‘The arc of history will not bend toward us unless we force it to’. Good line. A quote?
He had a point about importation of American style divisions – yes, some of comes from the left, but the Tories do try it themselves.
First mention of LDs, using legalistic language of ‘aiding and abetting’, and then many points about cuts.
Already many references to Cameron – building up to the Boris bogeyman (currently referred to only as one of Cameron’s ‘two successors’) or because he wants to make people who might look back fondly on Cameron to rethink, as it was they left that Labour first lost?
Not sure it is sensible to repeat all of the Tories’ slogans, sine some like them.
Section 3 – Present Quote from Raheem Sterling.
Still repeating the worst death toll in Europe line on Coronavirus – I just think it is a mistake, since by that measure France, Italy, Spain and Germany are right behind us and this makes us look not far off Germany when per capita we are much different.
‘The prime minister’ still, not Boris Johnson. Sensible all to try to flag up memories of breaches of lockdown rules, tory doners etc.
Stats stats stats on the NHS. He’s right about national plans for adult social care.
Interesting on Climate change that he accepts the government does thing something needs to be done, so is not accusing it of denialism, but that it lacks vision and ambition. Smarter than the Eco lobby.
Several mentions of vision in this section – which is a strength if they can pitch a good one, as he’s right about government short termism.
Now it is story time about two young people on different journeys of education and work. Not as amusing as a ‘imagine a world where x’ section in a past Green manifesto. But focusing on rise in renting, lack of opportunity
Second use of pernicious
Again pretty bold to talk about the years of Brexit ‘gridlock’.
Accusing Tories of exploiting divisions and having ‘bizarre obsessions’. I share some of those obsessions perhaps, but it is a smart move to paint the tories, not entirely unfairly, of focusing on some minutiae instead of bigger issues.
Is ‘multi headed hybra’ an oxymoron? Again tying Scottish nationalists to Conservatives, and how they have similar failures he says, both use culture to distract. I like it, but will Slab?
Section 4 – Future Now a quote from The Clash, apparently the only people to say the future is unwritten.
Now we are at a fork, after the earlier analogy others have mentioned about being at a crossroads. Maybe he meant a fork back then too.
Reused the ‘crying out for real change’ line, which is a cliché I really don’t like. People often do, then vote for no change.
‘Business has been let down’ by the Tories.
Reference to empty shelves and Brexit.
Talk of ending the shambolic public procurement – if he thinks he can change that he is very confident in his abilities indeed.
Mention of universal credit, surprised not to see more on it given recent talk.
Standard talk about how centralized the UK is. True, but despite devolution Labour has little interest in changing that – Whitehall does not trust local government.
Race Equality Act.
Back to talk of his time as DPP – not as many throughout as I’d think.
Mental health ‘as much a priority as physical health’ pretty sure Tories say the same, but doe they mean it, and would in practice it mean less attention on either?
Pandering to parents about high quality schools – yes, everyone wants one, but unless you can eliminate existence of crappy ones entirely some won’t get it.
‘I was not privately educated but I have worked in environments dominated by people who were’ – the Labour Party? Just kidding – this part feels a bit more passionate and personal.
Tories focusing on statues not women.
I kind of agree about the vanity yacht.
Another reference to ‘paucity’ of Tory offer.
Section 5 – The Road Ahead Right away mentioning Tories and LDs together, emphasizing past connection. ‘Painful debates’ over EU are over, that is ‘please come back northern leavers’.
Now we’re back at the crossroads not a fork – make up your mind!
In 10 principles, in politics aren’t all families ‘hard working familiies’? Work hard is mentioned in the second and fourth one as well – worried about seeming to be soft on scroungers I suppose. My Conclusion Not very personal, pretty standard points adequately but not astoundingly made. Some light mention of Labour’s navel gazing about its most recent government, but not much on why it has been struggling since. Principles at end a bit underwhelming.
Just been contacted by Flipper - who have been great for years flipping me on to the best energy deals with me having to do naff all - great service for £25 per year fee.
Anyway - they are ceasing trading. What a shame:
"With less reliable smaller retailer options available, and with others pulling tariffs from the market, there is now little or no option to flip customers. At the same time, we incur very high operating costs associated with the way the market is regulated.
With 18,000 Flipper customers being caught up in the supplier of last resort process this week, we are very sad to announce that we are withdrawing from the market, as we can no longer continue to offer the service promised to you, our loyal members and we can no longer sustain the great savings that as Flipper customers you have come to expect. "
"Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 I’ve been repeatedly briefed that some of Starmer’s current and former aides have given up on his prospects and are now pinning their hopes on Wes Streeting, who they hope can be made Labour leader via the electoral college"
Are Labour really so biased towards Londom MPs that they have to resort to someone that comes across as soft and wet as Wes Streeting? He's hardly the sort of person you'd want to follow into battle, is he?
Another London male labour leader is the last thing they need
"Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 I’ve been repeatedly briefed that some of Starmer’s current and former aides have given up on his prospects and are now pinning their hopes on Wes Streeting, who they hope can be made Labour leader via the electoral college"
Are Labour really so biased towards Londom MPs that they have to resort to someone that comes across as soft and wet as Wes Streeting? He's hardly the sort of person you'd want to follow into battle, is he?
Another London male labour leader is the last thing they need
Where though in the country could a really good Labour leader come from?... my mind is a blank!
Just been contacted by Flipper - who have been great for years flipping me on to the best energy deals with me having to do naff all - great service for £25 per year fee.
Anyway - they are ceasing trading. What a shame:
"With less reliable smaller retailer options available, and with others pulling tariffs from the market, there is now little or no option to flip customers. At the same time, we incur very high operating costs associated with the way the market is regulated.
With 18,000 Flipper customers being caught up in the supplier of last resort process this week, we are very sad to announce that we are withdrawing from the market, as we can no longer continue to offer the service promised to you, our loyal members and we can no longer sustain the great savings that as Flipper customers you have come to expect. "
Because they were agents for all the fly-by-night utility resellers, and now there’s no-one left to pay their commissions?
Just been contacted by Flipper - who have been great for years flipping me on to the best energy deals with me having to do naff all - great service for £25 per year fee.
Anyway - they are ceasing trading. What a shame:
"With less reliable smaller retailer options available, and with others pulling tariffs from the market, there is now little or no option to flip customers. At the same time, we incur very high operating costs associated with the way the market is regulated.
With 18,000 Flipper customers being caught up in the supplier of last resort process this week, we are very sad to announce that we are withdrawing from the market, as we can no longer continue to offer the service promised to you, our loyal members and we can no longer sustain the great savings that as Flipper customers you have come to expect. "
Because they were agents for all the fly-by-night utility resellers, and now there’s no-one left to pay their commissions?
Yes on the first point, but they never got commissions like comparison sites do - their revenue was from the £25pa annual fees.
Let’s just say that @kinabalu upthread should not give up the day job for literary criticism.
It feels like a piece of ad copy that an ill-organised client group have smothered to death.
I have to agree, so far.
He references ten principles which do no re-surface until the end and many are a bit 'meh'
"The government should treat taxpayer money as if it were its own." is part of one. Eh? The government should treat taxpayer money as if it belongs to the taxpayer, I'd say, and demonstrate that it's done something valuable with it or, failing that, give it back. I know what it's trying to say, but it is clumsy.
I think that's nitpicking of the same order as my objection to "crossroads". Treat the money "like it's your own" is something nobody will misunderstand. It's powerful and does 2 things at once. It reassures about Labour spending like a drunken sailor - bollocks but widely believed bollocks that has to be nailed. Ouch. And it speaks to the Tories' largesse to their rich mates, the corruption and venality they're famous for.
Edit: hat tip TUD for spotting the "crossroads" linguistic flaw even before I did.
I have to confess it was drawn to my attention by one of our band of Cybernat flying monkeys. They never sleep.
Starmer is a crap writer. But there is a but, IMO. That pamphlet is clearly signalling where he wants to take Labour's focus from here until the election: away from what matters most to party members and towards the primary concerns of regular voters.
He has identified those concerns as being insecurity - in the workplace, in housing, on the streets, in the environment, etc; and inequality - the opportunities that were once available to someone with his background are no longer there. Those, I think, are the basis for a strong message and for a set of coherent policies.
The message is this government has failed to deliver the security that people want and need; and it has failed to tackle the deep-seated inequalities that have developed in the UK over the last 30 years. The policies will be all about how Labour will change that.
Did this require 14,000 words? Probably not. Is it the beginnings of something that could resonate? I think it could be. Is Starmer capable of delivering? Increasingly, that looks unlikely. But I don't think the Labour party is currently capable of allowing anyone to.
Does anyone think this energy crisis could bring down the government?
I think they’re gonna have to ditch the cap. Even if they don’t, it’s looking quite possible average energy bills will rise to ~£1800 from April. For many people that will be almost double.
Hard not to see some political spillover.
Especially when it clashes with the COP26 rhetoric. It’s a head on smash between the Carrie wing of the Tory party and the red wall voters.
At some point soon, it’s going to hit that climate change mitigation comes with huge costs for the average person.
I already have nightmares of driving off while the car's still plugged in - And I haven't bought one yet!
I think the looming political problem is the increased cost of motoring. A lot of people rely on old petrol cars for cheap motoring. They cost almost nothing. By way of example, the total depreciation on my last car was £1700 over 4 years. There were no other costs at all, aside from annual servicing and MOT (£150), along with Insurance and petrol, but it did 40 mpg.
New cars, including electric cars, essentially cost at least £200 per month. They don't last the way that older petrol vehicles do due to the complicated tech and particularly battery life. If old cars are taxed and regulated out of existence, that is going to be a disaster for poor people.
Let them use bikes.
Secondhand electrical cars start at about £3000 at present.
I just paid £3,500 for a 2005 Mercedes E500. With a V8 and a big boot. How much does an EV of similar size and performance cost?
Yes, its going to be a massive problem for governments, millions of people with old cars rely on them for work, and don’t have somewhere dedicated to park at home. They’re nurses and warehouse workers.
Oh, and the £40bn ish of fuel duty and road tax.
I am not an expert, but my suspicion is that EV's are designed with a 7 year design life. They are leased, rather than sold, so resale values are of less significance. The whole business model of manufacturers has changed. Beyond around 7 years they seem essentially become uneconomic to keep running so they effectively go to be recycled.
The problem with a £3000 used electric car, if one exists; it would quickly become uneconomic to repair. The contrast with a low mileage ICE vehicle is significant; the latter can keep running indefinetly if it maintained.
As someone who cycles everywhere I support a societal shift to a shift to bikes or low maintainence battery scooters, but unfortunately it isn't going to be practical for a lot of people. Long distance travel is not feasible using such vehicles. And it poses the question of why can't the rich also make such a shift; after all a 1.5 ton lump of metal with a huge battery that only lasts for 7 years also has quite significant environmental consequences.
There are certainly old (2013) Teslas being written off with battery issues, and a replacement is £20k or thereabouts. There’s also stories of them being used as taxis and running up 300,000 miles. Both of these can of course be true, and it may be that age is more of a factor than mileage in determining vehicle life.
We’ll find out in the next few years!
One thing with older Electric cars is that the knowledge on how to best manage the life of a battery has only recently been discovered. So a lot of older (pre 2018 say) EVs will not have the battery management software more moderns car have that keep the battery in best condition.
The lack of battery management is a reason why I wouldn't recommend touching a Nissan Leaf (heck my cousin doesn't have one and he's a shift lead at the Sunderland Battery plant),
Everyone I know who works at Nissan would never buy a Nissan
1. What does Starmer stand for? He needs to set out a vision, not specific policies this early, but a vision of where he wants to take the country. 2. 14,000 words? I can't be bothered to read that, far too long. We need a 3-word vision, like Get Brexit Undone or something. 3. I've read it, and I don't like Starmer's vision. Why did he waste his time writing it? 4. What's the point of Starmer? He has nothing to say. 5. It's about time Starmer set out a vision for the future of the country. 6. Mind you, I'd never vote for him anyway, because I'm a Tory.
But by all accounts there's nothing said in the 14,000 words. Even if there is, who the hell has got time to read it. My master's thesis was only about 25k words and that was a culmination of 4 years of university.
If you can't see that 14,000 words is excessive then it's you that has got the issue, not us. I've got an open mind for Labour, but not enough to waste my time reading 14,000 words of what appears to be a long winded way of saying nothing at all.
He is writing for the Fabian Society, to be fair, not The Sun. People who are into things like the FS probably don't mind reading 14,000 words. When it comes to addressing the public at large he will obviously be more direct.
A very fair point Isam. Not something I have written before, I don't suppose...now on to your charisma quotient thesis.
I don't think it is a positive thing that charisma plays a bigger part than intellectual rigourt in electing PM's, I just think it probably does. I spent ages arguing Brown was more suited to PM than Cameron, but ultimately you have to recognise the way things work
Brown is/was the most wildly unsuitable PM that it's possible to imagine. The man is an absolute clown.
Cameron on the other hand was a really good PM.
Cameron mismanaged the EU issue, mismanaged the China issue, turned out to be purely PR on climate change, and implemented austerity too early.
"Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 I’ve been repeatedly briefed that some of Starmer’s current and former aides have given up on his prospects and are now pinning their hopes on Wes Streeting, who they hope can be made Labour leader via the electoral college"
Are Labour really so biased towards Londom MPs that they have to resort to someone that comes across as soft and wet as Wes Streeting? He's hardly the sort of person you'd want to follow into battle, is he?
Another London male labour leader is the last thing they need
Agreed. Wes who?!
Angela Rayner, Jess Phillips, or Rosena Allin-Khan would be my preference. Any of whom have 10x the charisma of poor well-meaning SKS.
Let’s just say that @kinabalu upthread should not give up the day job for literary criticism.
It feels like a piece of ad copy that an ill-organised client group have smothered to death.
I read it pretending I'm a floating apolitical voter somewhere in provincial England, no love for the Tories but I voted Tory last time because Corbyn scared me.
And it worked for me. For that me, it worked. It made me feel good about the man Keir Starmer and it made me look forward to seeing some policies.
"Owen Jones 🌹 @OwenJones84 I’ve been repeatedly briefed that some of Starmer’s current and former aides have given up on his prospects and are now pinning their hopes on Wes Streeting, who they hope can be made Labour leader via the electoral college"
Are Labour really so biased towards Londom MPs that they have to resort to someone that comes across as soft and wet as Wes Streeting? He's hardly the sort of person you'd want to follow into battle, is he?
Another London male labour leader is the last thing they need
Where though in the country could a really good Labour leader come from?... my mind is a blank!
Andy Burnham, Dan Jarvis and Lisa Nandy
Though Andy Burnham probably the best of the three
First mention of LDs, using legalistic language of ‘aiding and abetting’, and then many points about cuts.
Already many references to Cameron – building up to the Boris bogeyman (currently referred to only as one of Cameron’s ‘two successors’) or because he wants to make people who might look back fondly on Cameron to rethink, as it was they left that Labour first lost?
Not sure it is sensible to repeat all of the Tories’ slogans, sine some like them.
Section 3 – Present Quote from Raheem Sterling.
Still repeating the worst death toll in Europe line on Coronavirus – I just think it is a mistake, since by that measure France, Italy, Spain and Germany are right behind us and this makes us look not far off Germany when per capita we are much different.
‘The prime minister’ still, not Boris Johnson. Sensible all to try to flag up memories of breaches of lockdown rules, tory doners etc.
Stats stats stats on the NHS. He’s right about national plans for adult social care.
Interesting on Climate change that he accepts the government does thing something needs to be done, so is not accusing it of denialism, but that it lacks vision and ambition. Smarter than the Eco lobby.
Several mentions of vision in this section – which is a strength if they can pitch a good one, as he’s right about government short termism.
Now it is story time about two young people on different journeys of education and work. Not as amusing as a ‘imagine a world where x’ section in a past Green manifesto. But focusing on rise in renting, lack of opportunity
Second use of pernicious
Again pretty bold to talk about the years of Brexit ‘gridlock’.
Accusing Tories of exploiting divisions and having ‘bizarre obsessions’. I share some of those obsessions perhaps, but it is a smart move to paint the tories, not entirely unfairly, of focusing on some minutiae instead of bigger issues.
Is ‘multi headed hybra’ an oxymoron? Again tying Scottish nationalists to Conservatives, and how they have similar failures he says, both use culture to distract. I like it, but will Slab?
The Labour Party has to work with the other progressive parties of the centre-left and left if it wants to win back power. Language such as 'aiding and abetting' is very childish. I am not saying formal pacts but informal understanding at constituency level. The Labour die hards would hate it of course!
Just been contacted by Flipper - who have been great for years flipping me on to the best energy deals with me having to do naff all - great service for £25 per year fee.
Anyway - they are ceasing trading. What a shame:
"With less reliable smaller retailer options available, and with others pulling tariffs from the market, there is now little or no option to flip customers. At the same time, we incur very high operating costs associated with the way the market is regulated.
With 18,000 Flipper customers being caught up in the supplier of last resort process this week, we are very sad to announce that we are withdrawing from the market, as we can no longer continue to offer the service promised to you, our loyal members and we can no longer sustain the great savings that as Flipper customers you have come to expect. "
There are still good deals about, SSE's 2 yr fixed is negligibly over the current cap - all indications that'll be a saving post April 22.
Comments
I'm a Milibandite rather than a Corbynite, but he should, for instance, at the present political moment be summoning passion to fight the UC cut, which is politically and economically idiotic even for the Tories' prospects, let alone morally repellent.
"I’ve heard it said that ‘we’ve got to leave, because they’ll punish us if we don’t’, but my guess is that if we vote to stay, we will be in the heady position of the spouse who looked like walking out, but decided to give things one last go. All the major political parties are currently wooing us with offers of extra powers, keen to keep Scotland happy so that it does not hold an independence referendum every ten years and cause uncertainty and turmoil all over again. I doubt whether we will ever have been more popular, or in a better position to dictate terms, than if we vote to stay."
JK Rowling named Jack Blatherwick comes to the crease.
That currently being adopted for the cheaper end of the market (LFP) is likely to last considerably longer than some of the energy denser chemistries (also the mainstay of lithium battery bulk storage).
Everything falling, again, apart from cases among 5-14. 15-19 is tracking closer and closer to the vaccinated groups.
Your best comic riff yet, or maybe your first? Anyway: VG
Markets now expect a first rise in rates in February and another in November 2022 - bringing us to the giddy heights of 0.5%.
Where the public will start to notice is if this is insufficient to bring inflation down and rates have to rise much higher than that. Then people will really start to feel it in their mortgage payments.
Remember interest rates have only been above 0.5% for 18 months (up to 0.75%) in the last 13 years.
Recall the light fading as they dug us all deeper in.
He needs to assemble a new coalition, not an old one, of either Blair or Corbyn vintage, and he needs to show pretty soon now that he has the skills to do that.
Let’s just say that @kinabalu upthread should not give up the day job for literary criticism.
It feels like a piece of ad copy that an ill-organised client group have smothered to death.
(same guy thinks that Philip Collins co-wrote the essay)
But Keir has nothing to say, either.
Brown (though nobody on this board wants to hear this) had real intellectual heft.
More than those so-called wonks, the Milibands.
Did he write this too?
I hope not because it means that the Labour Party has become a place where ideas go to die.
Cameron on the other hand was a really good PM.
He references ten principles which do no re-surface until the end and many are a bit 'meh'
"The government should treat taxpayer money as if it were its own." is part of one. Eh? The government should treat taxpayer money as if it belongs to the taxpayer, I'd say, and demonstrate that it's done something valuable with it or, failing that, give it back. I know what it's trying to say, but it is clumsy.
Like Mike I rate Starmer higher than most people on PB. I'm not sure in these circs that anyone else could achieve more cut-through TBH. Is he being treated fairly?
Boris wouldn’t have written 14,000 words of nothing, when 1,500 words of nothing would have been both easier to write and better to read.
2021 is as pivotal a year as 1989, or 1945.
What country do we want to build?
Not Boris’s.
Nor Keir’s by the look of it.
We need Andy and Nandy.
See Berlusconi’s Italy for more details.
Keir has no ideas. He is a vacuum.
I find tunnels are very much like that, too. A portal to a new dimension. Sadly there are few in the UK with the same impact. Leaving urban Sheffield and reappearing in the Peak District, perhaps?
it is a crossroads, not a fork...
To be honest, I'm not entirely against turning round instead and heading back down the way we came.
It doesn't need to be figures exclusively from further left, or automatically from the party's further reaches of the right, but it does need genuine vision and some completely untried ideas, probably eclectically taking from both wings.
Keep right on to the end of the road
Keep right on to the end
Tho' the way be long, let your heart be strong
Keep right on to the end
Tho' you're tired and weary still journey on,
Till you come to your happy abode
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/sep/23/ministers-consider-plan-to-ease-20-a-week-universal-credit-cut
A mooted cut in the taper rate. From 63% to 60%. But it is a start.
Wes Streeting is only listed with Oddschecker at 33/1 with Skybet. Nothing of interest with the exchanges.
However, WHill has 66/1 available, though not shown on Oddschecker if you are interested. (They limit my stakes to a miserly £2 unfortunately.)
I much, much prefer betting on exchanges. However...
The next GE is still up for grabs so let's not write off Labour's chances just yet. Lots of water to flow under the bridge.
Edit: hat tip TUD for spotting the "crossroads" linguistic flaw even before I did.
For all my sniping though, I agree with Murali below, Starmer may still be the best choice right now and he may still win
Others have already had a go, so might as well – The Road Ahead. I welcome the effort, whatever the reception.
Title and contents
Keir Starmer MP, but not the Rt Hon. Sir Keir Starmer MP?
Image has trees, a couple, young people and at least one old person including walking stick – so inclusive.
Sections are hyperlinked in the document – I cannot tell you how rare this is. Most manifestoes did not do this, or only had one or two then gave up.
Foreword
Harmless fluff, as you’d expect from a foreword, but makes sure to highlight workers, education, health, climate change, and the standard ‘give decisions to local communities’, even if the latter is always talked about and never done.
Section 1 – Reflections
I think his point about the ‘complicated, sometimes contradictory way people are feeling’ is a good one.
Not overdoing the Conservative bashing as screeds sometimes do, not yet anyway, but brining it in to complement a point about damaging moments.
Pandemic change the way we work yadda yadda.
Bit of personal background, he has a decent story to tell. Interesting he makes sure to mention how proud his parents were that he was given a knighthood.
‘Does a working class child in Britain today have the same opportunity [Keir’s] generation did? It’s hard to think they do’. It may be a cliché point, but it’s the sort of thing he should push hard.
He wants Labour to be Britain’s ‘Bricks and mortar’. Not sure how well that metaphor works, but kudos for trying.
Section 2– Past
Quote from Cameron – cheeky. Reference to glory days of 1945, should stir some member love.
Not sure mentioning navel gazing in a 12000 word personal reflection is sensible, but well done to him for tackling head on that the party has harmed itself through its contesting the legacy of the 1997 Labour government (not the ‘Blair government’? He mentions him on the next page)
I wasn’t aware Cameron and Osborne were libertarians, but it says so here. But again, interesting that he tackles the adaptability of the Tories from the view of how it makes them hard to pin down, when Labour hinders itself, and not from a position of simple condemnation.
Makes sure to lump Scottish nationalists in with Conservatives around embracing or ignoring extremism et al.
‘The desire of people across the country to have real power and control – expressed most forcibly in the Brexit vote – remains unmet’. Er, what? I know he has moved on, but that is a bold point.
‘The arc of history will not bend toward us unless we force it to’. Good line. A quote?
He had a point about importation of American style divisions – yes, some of comes from the left, but the Tories do try it themselves.
First mention of LDs, using legalistic language of ‘aiding and abetting’, and then many points about cuts.
Already many references to Cameron – building up to the Boris bogeyman (currently referred to only as one of Cameron’s ‘two successors’) or because he wants to make people who might look back fondly on Cameron to rethink, as it was they left that Labour first lost?
Not sure it is sensible to repeat all of the Tories’ slogans, sine some like them.
Section 3 – Present
Quote from Raheem Sterling.
Still repeating the worst death toll in Europe line on Coronavirus – I just think it is a mistake, since by that measure France, Italy, Spain and Germany are right behind us and this makes us look not far off Germany when per capita we are much different.
‘The prime minister’ still, not Boris Johnson. Sensible all to try to flag up memories of breaches of lockdown rules, tory doners etc.
Stats stats stats on the NHS.
He’s right about national plans for adult social care.
Interesting on Climate change that he accepts the government does thing something needs to be done, so is not accusing it of denialism, but that it lacks vision and ambition. Smarter than the Eco lobby.
Several mentions of vision in this section – which is a strength if they can pitch a good one, as he’s right about government short termism.
Now it is story time about two young people on different journeys of education and work. Not as amusing as a ‘imagine a world where x’ section in a past Green manifesto. But focusing on rise in renting, lack of opportunity
Second use of pernicious
Again pretty bold to talk about the years of Brexit ‘gridlock’.
Accusing Tories of exploiting divisions and having ‘bizarre obsessions’. I share some of those obsessions perhaps, but it is a smart move to paint the tories, not entirely unfairly, of focusing on some minutiae instead of bigger issues.
Is ‘multi headed hybra’ an oxymoron? Again tying Scottish nationalists to Conservatives, and how they have similar failures he says, both use culture to distract. I like it, but will Slab?
Section 4 – Future
Now a quote from The Clash, apparently the only people to say the future is unwritten.
Now we are at a fork, after the earlier analogy others have mentioned about being at a crossroads. Maybe he meant a fork back then too.
Reused the ‘crying out for real change’ line, which is a cliché I really don’t like. People often do, then vote for no change.
‘Business has been let down’ by the Tories.
Reference to empty shelves and Brexit.
Talk of ending the shambolic public procurement – if he thinks he can change that he is very confident in his abilities indeed.
Mention of universal credit, surprised not to see more on it given recent talk.
Standard talk about how centralized the UK is. True, but despite devolution Labour has little interest in changing that – Whitehall does not trust local government.
Race Equality Act.
Back to talk of his time as DPP – not as many throughout as I’d think.
Mental health ‘as much a priority as physical health’ pretty sure Tories say the same, but doe they mean it, and would in practice it mean less attention on either?
Pandering to parents about high quality schools – yes, everyone wants one, but unless you can eliminate existence of crappy ones entirely some won’t get it.
‘I was not privately educated but I have worked in environments dominated by people who were’ – the Labour Party? Just kidding – this part feels a bit more passionate and personal.
Tories focusing on statues not women.
I kind of agree about the vanity yacht.
Another reference to ‘paucity’ of Tory offer.
Section 5 – The Road Ahead
Right away mentioning Tories and LDs together, emphasizing past connection. ‘Painful debates’ over EU are over, that is ‘please come back northern leavers’.
Now we’re back at the crossroads not a fork – make up your mind!
In 10 principles, in politics aren’t all families ‘hard working familiies’? Work hard is mentioned in the second and fourth one as well – worried about seeming to be soft on scroungers I suppose.
My Conclusion
Not very personal, pretty standard points adequately but not astoundingly made. Some light mention of Labour’s navel gazing about its most recent government, but not much on why it has been struggling since. Principles at end a bit underwhelming.
Anyway - they are ceasing trading. What a shame:
"With less reliable smaller retailer options available, and with others pulling tariffs from the market, there is now little or no option to flip customers. At the same time, we incur very high operating costs associated with the way the market is regulated.
With 18,000 Flipper customers being caught up in the supplier of last resort process this week, we are very sad to announce that we are withdrawing from the market, as we can no longer continue to offer the service promised to you, our loyal members and we can no longer sustain the great savings that as Flipper customers you have come to expect. "
https://twitter.com/AaronParnas/status/1441052899430191117?s=19
On the other, I'd love all my electronics devices to have the same charging cable
He has identified those concerns as being insecurity - in the workplace, in housing, on the streets, in the environment, etc; and inequality - the opportunities that were once available to someone with his background are no longer there. Those, I think, are the basis for a strong message and for a set of coherent policies.
The message is this government has failed to deliver the security that people want and need; and it has failed to tackle the deep-seated inequalities that have developed in the UK over the last 30 years. The policies will be all about how Labour will change that.
Did this require 14,000 words? Probably not. Is it the beginnings of something that could resonate? I think it could be. Is Starmer capable of delivering? Increasingly, that looks unlikely. But I don't think the Labour party is currently capable of allowing anyone to.
I would very much like to be wrong.
Angela Rayner, Jess Phillips, or Rosena Allin-Khan would be my preference. Any of whom have 10x the charisma of poor well-meaning SKS.
And it worked for me. For that me, it worked. It made me feel good about the man Keir Starmer and it made me look forward to seeing some policies.
This is how to assess it imo.
Though Andy Burnham probably the best of the three