Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Starmer’s challenge: LAB starts in an almost impossible position – politicalbetting.com

2456712

Comments

  • darkagedarkage Posts: 5,398

    Fpt

    This isn’t just the “hard left”. Jeremy Corbyn’s appeal wasn’t just with the “hard left” it was with younger people who don’t normally pay much attention to politics.

    Those people will generally vote green without a second thought to tactical voting. Voting Green has none of the stigma that voting SWP (or even UKIP) would have and that’s why its a threat to the Labour Party.

    I would love the far left to be chucked out, and maybe it’s worth the risk as @Stuartinromford says, but to pretend that there are no downsides for Labour is difficult.

    Why do you think that Labour need the exteme minority of the far left?

    Why do you think that the Tories don't need the extreme minority of the far right?

    Kicking out the extremists, in British politics, is proven to work. No extremist party in my lifetime has ever won in the UK. The centre moves, but the far right and far left are always outsiders.
    I don’t think you’re reading my posts properly. I’m not talking about the far left.
    Yes, but everybody else is!

    Kicking out the far left is what is being spoken about. The far left should be expelled from the Labour Party every bit as ruthlessly as the far right are expelled from the Tories.

    There are zero far right MPs in the Tories. The centre right and medium right voters stick with the Tories though and centrist voters join with them too. Even some centre left join them.

    For Labour to win they don't need the far left. They need medium and centre left and centrists.

    The depends on how you define far-left and far-right.

    This man is still a Tory MP, for example.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51406407

    I never understood why this was regarded as a "far right" meeting. It makes it sound like it was a neo nazi event. People may not like it, but Victor Orban and the Law and Justice Party in Poland are part of the European political mainstream. Both are in government, and both have been welcomed on visits to the UK.

  • The Tories have a band of, if not fascist, then decidedly fruity MPs down in West Hampshire (Swayne, Chope). Must be something in the water.

    Northamptonshire seems to be another redoubt of Tory lunacy.
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,700
    geoffw said:

    R4 this a.m. "Brexit paves the way for gene-edited crops"
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58711230
    The UK government is to relax the regulation of gene-edited crops to enable commercial growing in England. European Union regulations require that gene-edited crops are treated the same as genetically-modified crops.

    These rules call for a number of field trials over a period of several years, as well as extensive food safety tests.
    The final hurdle is for member states to vote to approve a new variety.
    This approach is regarded by biotech companies as too onerous and expensive, so no genetically altered crops are developed in the European Union.
    As this is in a devolved area of policy it will be interesting to see whether the devolved administrations will follow England. Or will they stick to EU rules because they were dragged out of the EU against their will?

    At last - a real benefit of Brexit!
  • A former Labour MP writes:

    Those who think our traditional voters had nowhere else to go need to think again. And many in the party did think there was no other choice for our working-class supporters than to dutifully keep on voting Labour, election after election. Memories of the Tories were often enough to pull them back into line, but that simply does not work anymore.

    http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2021/09/29/dont-expect-buyers-remorse-it-is-going-to-take-hard-slog-to-rebuild-the-red-wall/
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    BoJo’s party is going to struggle to hold onto the the six seats it has in Scotland

    Is there any evidence to back up that statement ?

    Three of them look pretty safe and its also possible that there is a swing to the Conservatives in Scotland.

    Agreed. Sturgeon's administration is looking ever more inept and hapless and she herself looks worn down by an extensive period in office. The internal bickering in the SNP is becoming all the more vicious and repellent. Calling a loss or a gain for the Tories this far out is unwise. It really could go either way.
  • DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
  • Politics has not been "normal" in this country since 2016.

    Do you think the election of the SNP was "normal" in 2011, leading to the independence referendum? The surge of UKIP in 2012-2013? Or the election of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader in 2015?

    A lot of the old party alliance and 'rules' started breaking down around the time of the credit crunch, and in its aftermath.

    It's a bit lazy to date everything to 2016.

    It's a fair point. I guess by normal, I meant things like swing-back, governments losing by-elections, the existence of the red wall, no global pandemic, etc etc.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
  • darkage said:

    Fpt

    This isn’t just the “hard left”. Jeremy Corbyn’s appeal wasn’t just with the “hard left” it was with younger people who don’t normally pay much attention to politics.

    Those people will generally vote green without a second thought to tactical voting. Voting Green has none of the stigma that voting SWP (or even UKIP) would have and that’s why its a threat to the Labour Party.

    I would love the far left to be chucked out, and maybe it’s worth the risk as @Stuartinromford says, but to pretend that there are no downsides for Labour is difficult.

    Why do you think that Labour need the exteme minority of the far left?

    Why do you think that the Tories don't need the extreme minority of the far right?

    Kicking out the extremists, in British politics, is proven to work. No extremist party in my lifetime has ever won in the UK. The centre moves, but the far right and far left are always outsiders.
    I don’t think you’re reading my posts properly. I’m not talking about the far left.
    Yes, but everybody else is!

    Kicking out the far left is what is being spoken about. The far left should be expelled from the Labour Party every bit as ruthlessly as the far right are expelled from the Tories.

    There are zero far right MPs in the Tories. The centre right and medium right voters stick with the Tories though and centrist voters join with them too. Even some centre left join them.

    For Labour to win they don't need the far left. They need medium and centre left and centrists.

    The depends on how you define far-left and far-right.

    This man is still a Tory MP, for example.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51406407

    I never understood why this was regarded as a "far right" meeting. It makes it sound like it was a neo nazi event. People may not like it, but Victor Orban and the Law and Justice Party in Poland are part of the European political mainstream. Both are in government, and both have been welcomed on visits to the UK.

    Kawczynski comes across as entirely dodgy.
    Not just this meeting, but various comments over the years.

    Also, I don’t think most would describe Orban or L&J as part of the European political mainstream even if they hold power in two key European states.
  • geoffw said:

    R4 this a.m. "Brexit paves the way for gene-edited crops"
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58711230
    The UK government is to relax the regulation of gene-edited crops to enable commercial growing in England. European Union regulations require that gene-edited crops are treated the same as genetically-modified crops.

    These rules call for a number of field trials over a period of several years, as well as extensive food safety tests.
    The final hurdle is for member states to vote to approve a new variety.
    This approach is regarded by biotech companies as too onerous and expensive, so no genetically altered crops are developed in the European Union.
    As this is in a devolved area of policy it will be interesting to see whether the devolved administrations will follow England. Or will they stick to EU rules because they were dragged out of the EU against their will?

    That is the first proper benefit of Brexit I have seen. Moves Brexit from pointless to largely pointless from my perspective
  • DavidL said:

    BoJo’s party is going to struggle to hold onto the the six seats it has in Scotland

    Is there any evidence to back up that statement ?

    Three of them look pretty safe and its also possible that there is a swing to the Conservatives in Scotland.

    Agreed. Sturgeon's administration is looking ever more inept and hapless and she herself looks worn down by an extensive period in office. The internal bickering in the SNP is becoming all the more vicious and repellent. Calling a loss or a gain for the Tories this far out is unwise. It really could go either way.
    How come is that not being seen in the Scottish polls?
  • Policy fail depends upon what the objectives of the policy were.

    Considering the objective seemed to be purely media spin to get the conversation moved on from the media, who had created a media-driven panic, then possibly that might be considered a[n extremely cynical] policy success?

    With over a million qualified HGV drivers in the UK alone the onus is back on employer's to offer a fair market wage to fill the vacancies, as they should. And if wages go up, HMRC gets extra taxes since IR35 means its no longer a tax dodging industry.
  • tlg86 said:

    Sandpit said:

    tlg86 said:

    By the way, yesterday's weekly death stats publication...

    https://tinyurl.com/ydhrmd3v

    Week 37:

    Five-year average (2015-2019): 9,306
    COVID deaths: 851
    Non-COVID deaths: 10,158

    Even without the COVID deaths - some will be with rather than from COVID - the non-COVID deaths were 852 above the five-year average. The sequence for non-COVID deaths v five-year average for the last 11 weeks is:

    09-Jul-21: 386
    16-Jul-21: 229
    23-Jul-21: 324
    30-Jul-21: 679
    06-Aug-21: 624
    13-Aug-21: 699
    20-Aug-21: 358
    27-Aug-21: 443
    03-Sep-21*: -103
    10-Sep-21*: 996
    17-Sep-21: 852

    * affected by the bank holiday

    No one in the media is talking about this, but it's an interesting story. I reckon we are catching up from the deaths avoided last winter. Quite what this means in terms of pressure on the NHS, I don't know. After all, old people dying is less of a problem than them being ill, but perhaps the two are correlated.

    Interesting that deaths in general are running above average, even without the direct pandemic effect.

    What are we seeing then, indirect effects of healthcare systems being overloaded, treatable conditions being missed during the pandemic, more accidents as everyone gets back to work and on the roads?
    Low hanging fruit that avoided the reaper last winter due to lockdown...

    Week: difference of non-COVID deaths to five-year average

    2: -3,025
    3: -2,962
    4: -2,745
    5: -2,334
    6: -2,262
    7: -1,897
    8: -1,848
    9: -1,696
    10: -2,012
    11: -1,857
    12: -1,247
    13: -2,329
    14: -1,586
    Interesting.

    For an international comparison:

    https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/coronavirus-excess-deaths-tracker

    Most countries have similar. I wonder if increased isolation is to blame for the difference.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046

    Sandpit said:

    The "future of aviation".....in a 36 year old aircraft:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/winners-of-3-million-zero-emission-flight-aviation-competition-announced

    It's a Dornier Aurigny sold them earlier this year....

    15 projects given a total of £700,000. Can’t see that going too far, when trying to do anything involving aeroplanes.
    It needs something like the X Prize. A $10mn prize for a jumbo jet design that is purely electric.

    Or just have the market keep doing what its doing as I suspect people are working on it for commercial reasons anyway.
    An electric-powered jumbo-sized plane at this point is a long way away, probably decades. Unless someone puts a nuclear reactor on one. The batteries are a couple of orders of magnitude too heavy, and the plane doesn’t lose weight as they get discharged.

    There have been prototypes of small island-hopping seaplanes powered by batteries, which only need half an hour’s range and carry half a dozen people. Might work in the Maldives or somewhere similar.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,994
    The 'Not Corbyn' and 'Not Johnson Party' is not to be underestimated. If Johnson becomes as toxic as Corbyn was which is highly likely as the Brexit effect takes hold then good times could be round the corner.

    A big day for Starmer. He's definitely improving and he's got a much better back story than Corbyn which I'm sure we'll hear about today.

    I'm starting to feel optimistic.
  • isam said:

    Politics has not been "normal" in this country since 2016.

    Do you think the election of the SNP was "normal" in 2011, leading to the independence referendum? The surge of UKIP in 2012-2013? Or the election of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader in 2015?

    A lot of the old party alliance and 'rules' started breaking down around the time of the credit crunch, and in its aftermath.

    It's a bit lazy to date everything to 2016.
    The General Election of 2010 had the least normal outcome I can remember - a lot of people had just got used to getting their own way until 2016 and the shock of defeat, and that other people whose lives they hadn’t considered voted against their status quo, is still reverberating
    Yes, the Conservatives should have cleaned up with a clear majority and 40%+ of the vote in 2010, but lots of people still weren't convinced.

    That's why it was inconclusive; it should have been taken as a serious warning sign at the time.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    DavidL said:

    BoJo’s party is going to struggle to hold onto the the six seats it has in Scotland

    Is there any evidence to back up that statement ?

    Three of them look pretty safe and its also possible that there is a swing to the Conservatives in Scotland.

    Agreed. Sturgeon's administration is looking ever more inept and hapless and she herself looks worn down by an extensive period in office. The internal bickering in the SNP is becoming all the more vicious and repellent. Calling a loss or a gain for the Tories this far out is unwise. It really could go either way.
    Did someone on here mention the other day, that Alex Salmond is publishing a book of all his stories, including those he was barred from using in his defence at the enquiry?
  • Politics has not been "normal" in this country since 2016.

    Do you think the election of the SNP was "normal" in 2011, leading to the independence referendum? The surge of UKIP in 2012-2013? Or the election of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader in 2015?

    A lot of the old party alliance and 'rules' started breaking down around the time of the credit crunch, and in its aftermath.

    It's a bit lazy to date everything to 2016.

    It's a fair point. I guess by normal, I meant things like swing-back, governments losing by-elections, the existence of the red wall, no global pandemic, etc etc.

    Fair enough.
  • On Scotland the September Opinium Scottish poll had SNP up 6% and the Tories down 4%. That's a 5% CON to SNP swing.

    And the more recent Panelbase gives a swing of 2%.

    So what in any case - Scottish electoral shifts are complex.

    Now what odds are you offering that there are no SCON MPs elected next time ?
  • darkage said:

    Fpt

    This isn’t just the “hard left”. Jeremy Corbyn’s appeal wasn’t just with the “hard left” it was with younger people who don’t normally pay much attention to politics.

    Those people will generally vote green without a second thought to tactical voting. Voting Green has none of the stigma that voting SWP (or even UKIP) would have and that’s why its a threat to the Labour Party.

    I would love the far left to be chucked out, and maybe it’s worth the risk as @Stuartinromford says, but to pretend that there are no downsides for Labour is difficult.

    Why do you think that Labour need the exteme minority of the far left?

    Why do you think that the Tories don't need the extreme minority of the far right?

    Kicking out the extremists, in British politics, is proven to work. No extremist party in my lifetime has ever won in the UK. The centre moves, but the far right and far left are always outsiders.
    I don’t think you’re reading my posts properly. I’m not talking about the far left.
    Yes, but everybody else is!

    Kicking out the far left is what is being spoken about. The far left should be expelled from the Labour Party every bit as ruthlessly as the far right are expelled from the Tories.

    There are zero far right MPs in the Tories. The centre right and medium right voters stick with the Tories though and centrist voters join with them too. Even some centre left join them.

    For Labour to win they don't need the far left. They need medium and centre left and centrists.

    The depends on how you define far-left and far-right.

    This man is still a Tory MP, for example.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51406407

    I never understood why this was regarded as a "far right" meeting. It makes it sound like it was a neo nazi event. People may not like it, but Victor Orban and the Law and Justice Party in Poland are part of the European political mainstream. Both are in government, and both have been welcomed on visits to the UK.

    A definition where holding power exempts people from being described as far right is most curious and certainly does not stand up to even cursory historical scrutiny.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    The "future of aviation".....in a 36 year old aircraft:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/winners-of-3-million-zero-emission-flight-aviation-competition-announced

    It's a Dornier Aurigny sold them earlier this year....

    15 projects given a total of £700,000. Can’t see that going too far, when trying to do anything involving aeroplanes.
    It needs something like the X Prize. A $10mn prize for a jumbo jet design that is purely electric.

    Or just have the market keep doing what its doing as I suspect people are working on it for commercial reasons anyway.
    An electric-powered jumbo-sized plane at this point is a long way away, probably decades. Unless someone puts a nuclear reactor on one. The batteries are a couple of orders of magnitude too heavy, and the plane doesn’t lose weight as they get discharged.

    There have been prototypes of small island-hopping seaplanes powered by batteries, which only need half an hour’s range and carry half a dozen people. Might work in the Maldives or somewhere similar.
    So maximum takeoff weight and maximum structural landing weight have to be identical. Problematic.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 39,064

    Graduate voting intentions from latest
    IpsosMORI political monitor
    CON 30%
    LAB 41%
    LD 12%
    GRN 6%

    That's really poor for Labour. I'd have expected Labour to be closer to 50%.
  • geoffw said:

    R4 this a.m. "Brexit paves the way for gene-edited crops"
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58711230
    The UK government is to relax the regulation of gene-edited crops to enable commercial growing in England. European Union regulations require that gene-edited crops are treated the same as genetically-modified crops.

    These rules call for a number of field trials over a period of several years, as well as extensive food safety tests.
    The final hurdle is for member states to vote to approve a new variety.
    This approach is regarded by biotech companies as too onerous and expensive, so no genetically altered crops are developed in the European Union.
    As this is in a devolved area of policy it will be interesting to see whether the devolved administrations will follow England. Or will they stick to EU rules because they were dragged out of the EU against their will?
    At last - a real benefit of Brexit!

    My thoughts entirely. Boris Johnson bound to fuck it up though!
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,095
    To ensure Starmer becomes PM Labour need to gain about 55 Tory seats. That would ensure Labour + SNP + LD + PC + SDLP + Alliance + Green would have more seats even than the Tories + the DUP or UUP and TUV combined.

    Of course the more seats the LDs and SNP gain from the Tories then the lower that target for Labour becomes
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    What evidence is there that liberally-minded people have left? I mean I know I have and I'm on the very liberal wing, but what other evidence is there?

    Pro-Europe != liberal.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    edited September 2021

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    Kemi Badenoch is doing an awesome job as Equalities minister, trying to promote policies that unite people, rather than divide them.

    Conservatives don’t need all-women shortlists, or discrimination by race, to end up with a diverse team of politicians in their senior ranks.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,095
    edited September 2021
    Andy Burnham and Angela Rayner doing karaoke together at a party at the Labour conference last night

    https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1443059149579956228?s=20
  • geoffw said:

    R4 this a.m. "Brexit paves the way for gene-edited crops"
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58711230
    The UK government is to relax the regulation of gene-edited crops to enable commercial growing in England. European Union regulations require that gene-edited crops are treated the same as genetically-modified crops.

    These rules call for a number of field trials over a period of several years, as well as extensive food safety tests.
    The final hurdle is for member states to vote to approve a new variety.
    This approach is regarded by biotech companies as too onerous and expensive, so no genetically altered crops are developed in the European Union.
    As this is in a devolved area of policy it will be interesting to see whether the devolved administrations will follow England. Or will they stick to EU rules because they were dragged out of the EU against their will?
    That is the first proper benefit of Brexit I have seen. Moves Brexit from pointless to largely pointless from my perspective

    I think this is why we've refused to align on SPS standards.

    Food production is going to be very political in the years to come.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,572

    darkage said:


    I never understood why this was regarded as a "far right" meeting. It makes it sound like it was a neo nazi event. People may not like it, but Victor Orban and the Law and Justice Party in Poland are part of the European political mainstream. Both are in government, and both have been welcomed on visits to the UK.

    Kawczynski comes across as entirely dodgy.
    Not just this meeting, but various comments over the years.

    Also, I don’t think most would describe Orban or L&J as part of the European political mainstream even if they hold power in two key European states.

    They're both actively engaged in Trump-like dismantling of democratic and legal obstacles to unrestricted power. The only debate about them in Europe is how far to go in isolating them. I wouldn't call them neo-Nazi, but far-right is certainly correct.
  • Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    Kemi Badenock is doing an awesome job as Equalities minister, trying to promote policies that unite people, rather than divide them.

    Conservatives don’t need all-women shortlists, or discrimination by race, to end up with a diverse team of politicians in their senior ranks.
    Absolutely. The only reason you need all-women shortlists, or discrimination by race, is if you consider women or minorities to not rise to the top on their own merits.

    Simply don't be discriminatory and recognise talent and the cream reaches the top.
  • eek said:

    Good Morning

    The ultimate put down

    Gina Miller, businesswoman and anti-Brexit activists tweets

    'Anyone seen Boris Johnson'

    Rachel Johnson, Boris's sister replies

    'It was our Mother's funeral yesterday, Gina'

    To which I have to ask the question, why did Boris appear on TV regarding fuel issues, surely that could have been delegated...
    He did appear yesterday for the first time in a while, but I am not sure when his Mother's funeral took place, other than a few days ago
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    What evidence is there that liberally-minded people have left? I mean I know I have and I'm on the very liberal wing, but what other evidence is there?

    Pro-Europe != liberal.
    You are not liberal Philip, you are libertarian. Try and understand there is a difference. Plus you said you were resigning, so did you fib on that point? Generally those who were liberal Tories , or call them centrist if you like were not in favour of Brexit. Those in the parliamentary party had the whip withdrawn by The Clown at the behest of his puppet masters on the hard right of the party. The Tory party of today is far less diverse politically and far more to the populist right than it ever was under Margaret Thatcher
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    DavidL said:

    BoJo’s party is going to struggle to hold onto the the six seats it has in Scotland

    Is there any evidence to back up that statement ?

    Three of them look pretty safe and its also possible that there is a swing to the Conservatives in Scotland.

    Agreed. Sturgeon's administration is looking ever more inept and hapless and she herself looks worn down by an extensive period in office. The internal bickering in the SNP is becoming all the more vicious and repellent. Calling a loss or a gain for the Tories this far out is unwise. It really could go either way.
    How come is that not being seen in the Scottish polls?
    The position in Scotland is pretty static in the polling for well over a year now: https://ballotbox.scot/uk-parliament/polling On one view it has been pretty static since 2014.

    But Sturgeon got a lot of credit (rightly or wrongly) for her mother of the nation stich. The problems with her own party as she fails to deliver a second referendum are in my view likely to become increasingly severe.

    It's possible that none of this will matter and that Boris will annoy enough Scots to wipe the Tories out. But it is in my view equally likely that the uncomfortable bed fellows in the SNP will fall out resulting in weakness at the polls and possible seat losses. I am not saying you are wrong (and I of course agree that this is a relatively small game for the Tories in terms of their overall majority) but I genuinely believe that the current logjam in Scotland cannot last indefinitely and will break decisively at some point one way or the other.
  • Graduate voting intentions from latest
    IpsosMORI political monitor
    CON 30%
    LAB 41%
    LD 12%
    GRN 6%

    Wonder what it would look like if Labour backed a halving of tuition fees, including retrospective debt, along with a 2% drop in income tax, paid for by merging NI into IT so the richest cohort also contribute their fair share.

    Should bring quite a few switchers in, and they don't have many pensioner votes to lose (those that are still voting Labour might be quite sticky anyway).
    The image of a sticky pensioner is not one I needed to have this morning, thanks.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,994
    eek said:

    Good Morning

    The ultimate put down

    Gina Miller, businesswoman and anti-Brexit activists tweets

    'Anyone seen Boris Johnson'

    Rachel Johnson, Boris's sister replies

    'It was our Mother's funeral yesterday, Gina'

    To which I have to ask the question, why did Boris appear on TV regarding fuel issues, surely that could have been delegated...
    ....and a thousand similar questions. I'm surprised that one of the few Johnsons you could feel respect for should use this occasion to try to portray her brother as other than the amoral hedonist she knows him to be.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    IshmaelZ said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    The "future of aviation".....in a 36 year old aircraft:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/winners-of-3-million-zero-emission-flight-aviation-competition-announced

    It's a Dornier Aurigny sold them earlier this year....

    15 projects given a total of £700,000. Can’t see that going too far, when trying to do anything involving aeroplanes.
    It needs something like the X Prize. A $10mn prize for a jumbo jet design that is purely electric.

    Or just have the market keep doing what its doing as I suspect people are working on it for commercial reasons anyway.
    An electric-powered jumbo-sized plane at this point is a long way away, probably decades. Unless someone puts a nuclear reactor on one. The batteries are a couple of orders of magnitude too heavy, and the plane doesn’t lose weight as they get discharged.

    There have been prototypes of small island-hopping seaplanes powered by batteries, which only need half an hour’s range and carry half a dozen people. Might work in the Maldives or somewhere similar.
    So maximum takeoff weight and maximum structural landing weight have to be identical. Problematic.
    Indeed.

    A long-haul plane encountering difficulty soon after takeoff today, usually dumps a load of fuel overboard to get down to maximum landing weight, can’t do that with an electric plane.

    From the top of my head, a 777 flying 14 hours from Dubai to New York starts with 100 ish tonnes of fuel on board, which is 30% ish of its takeoff weight.
  • isam said:

    Politics has not been "normal" in this country since 2016.

    Do you think the election of the SNP was "normal" in 2011, leading to the independence referendum? The surge of UKIP in 2012-2013? Or the election of Jeremy Corbyn as Labour leader in 2015?

    A lot of the old party alliance and 'rules' started breaking down around the time of the credit crunch, and in its aftermath.

    It's a bit lazy to date everything to 2016.
    The General Election of 2010 had the least normal outcome I can remember - a lot of people had just got used to getting their own way until 2016 and the shock of defeat, and that other people whose lives they hadn’t considered voted against their status quo, is still reverberating
    Yes, the Conservatives should have cleaned up with a clear majority and 40%+ of the vote in 2010, but lots of people still weren't convinced.

    That's why it was inconclusive; it should have been taken as a serious warning sign at the time.
    Lots of people the Conservatives targeted in 2010 weren't convinced and haven't been convinced since - the Conservatives underachieved in London in 2010 and then did again in 2015.

    It was midland and northern constituencies which had been Labour in 1992 but Conservative in 2010 which made Cameron PM.
  • geoffw said:

    R4 this a.m. "Brexit paves the way for gene-edited crops"
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58711230
    The UK government is to relax the regulation of gene-edited crops to enable commercial growing in England. European Union regulations require that gene-edited crops are treated the same as genetically-modified crops.

    These rules call for a number of field trials over a period of several years, as well as extensive food safety tests.
    The final hurdle is for member states to vote to approve a new variety.
    This approach is regarded by biotech companies as too onerous and expensive, so no genetically altered crops are developed in the European Union.
    As this is in a devolved area of policy it will be interesting to see whether the devolved administrations will follow England. Or will they stick to EU rules because they were dragged out of the EU against their will?
    That is the first proper benefit of Brexit I have seen. Moves Brexit from pointless to largely pointless from my perspective
    I think this is why we've refused to align on SPS standards.

    Food production is going to be very political in the years to come.

    Agreed. It would be sensible if the government started to soften the public up to acceptance of GM. There is massive scientific evidence that it is safe and has massive potential benefits
  • MaxPB said:

    Graduate voting intentions from latest
    IpsosMORI political monitor
    CON 30%
    LAB 41%
    LD 12%
    GRN 6%

    That's really poor for Labour. I'd have expected Labour to be closer to 50%.
    What across all graduates? Including "boomers". If that includes all age groups it feeds the narrative that if you are educated you are unlikely to vote Conservative. Not a good look for any party that should be taken seriously. Oh, hang on...Boris Johnson!
  • Good morning, everyone.

    Shopping report: some low stock levels but this has almost always been a feature and nothing was totally missing. Also, low mask wearing.

    There was no petrol at all, although this may be because there's no petrol station attached to this supermarket.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 21,830
    Roger said:

    eek said:

    Good Morning

    The ultimate put down

    Gina Miller, businesswoman and anti-Brexit activists tweets

    'Anyone seen Boris Johnson'

    Rachel Johnson, Boris's sister replies

    'It was our Mother's funeral yesterday, Gina'

    To which I have to ask the question, why did Boris appear on TV regarding fuel issues, surely that could have been delegated...
    ....and a thousand similar questions. I'm surprised that one of the few Johnsons you could feel respect for should use this occasion to try to portray her brother as other than the amoral hedonist she knows him to be.
    Dans notre société, tout homme qui ne pleure pas à l'enterrement de sa mère risque d' être condamné à mort.

    We don't know if he did or not, but surely this once we can give him a break?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,095

    MaxPB said:

    Graduate voting intentions from latest
    IpsosMORI political monitor
    CON 30%
    LAB 41%
    LD 12%
    GRN 6%

    That's really poor for Labour. I'd have expected Labour to be closer to 50%.
    What across all graduates? Including "boomers". If that includes all age groups it feeds the narrative that if you are educated you are unlikely to vote Conservative. Not a good look for any party that should be taken seriously. Oh, hang on...Boris Johnson!
    May lost graduates too. It is partly a symptom of age eg only about 10% of over 65s are graduates compared to 40% of 18 to 24s and Labour does best amongst the young. So actually IQ wise there is probably little difference between the Conservative and Labour vote, just more graduates are now of average rather than high IQ than was the case 50 years ago.

    The last Conservative leader to win graduates was Cameron in 2015 but then he won all voters over 35 which was significantly younger than Boris and May who only won voters over 45
  • Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    Kemi Badenock is doing an awesome job as Equalities minister, trying to promote policies that unite people, rather than divide them.

    Conservatives don’t need all-women shortlists, or discrimination by race, to end up with a diverse team of politicians in their senior ranks.
    Absolutely. The only reason you need all-women shortlists, or discrimination by race, is if you consider women or minorities to not rise to the top on their own merits.

    Simply don't be discriminatory and recognise talent and the cream reaches the top.
    Once again you show your lack of understanding. This is not born out by reality. You pretend to be liberally minded but in truth you do not have the first clue. What the Americans call "affirmative action" (which is illegal in UK - except it seems with political parties) seeks to balance opportunity in the workplace - a counter balance to the clear obstacles that stop "the cream" from reaching the top. If you think prejudice or bias, whether conscious or unconscious does not exist, you are very out of touch, or your protestations about your belief in equality are all fluff.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,003

    Good morning, everyone.

    Shopping report: some low stock levels but this has almost always been a feature and nothing was totally missing. Also, low mask wearing.

    There was no petrol at all, although this may be because there's no petrol station attached to this supermarket.

    Poor show. They could have been selling it in lemonade bottles.....
  • HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Graduate voting intentions from latest
    IpsosMORI political monitor
    CON 30%
    LAB 41%
    LD 12%
    GRN 6%

    That's really poor for Labour. I'd have expected Labour to be closer to 50%.
    What across all graduates? Including "boomers". If that includes all age groups it feeds the narrative that if you are educated you are unlikely to vote Conservative. Not a good look for any party that should be taken seriously. Oh, hang on...Boris Johnson!
    May lost graduates too. It is partly a symptom of age eg only about 10% of over 65s are graduates compared to 40% of 18 to 24s and Labour does best amongst the young. So actually IQ wise there is probably little difference between the Conservative and Labour vote, just more graduates are now of average rather than high IQ than was the case 50 years ago.

    The last Conservative leader to win graduates was Cameron in 2015 but then he won all voters over 35 which was significantly younger than Boris and May who only won voters over 45
    Interesting, thank you. Do you have any data for further back. My instinct (possibly unconscious bias) was that back in the 80s the more educated tended to vote Tory?
  • Roger said:

    eek said:

    Good Morning

    The ultimate put down

    Gina Miller, businesswoman and anti-Brexit activists tweets

    'Anyone seen Boris Johnson'

    Rachel Johnson, Boris's sister replies

    'It was our Mother's funeral yesterday, Gina'

    To which I have to ask the question, why did Boris appear on TV regarding fuel issues, surely that could have been delegated...
    ....and a thousand similar questions. I'm surprised that one of the few Johnsons you could feel respect for should use this occasion to try to portray her brother as other than the amoral hedonist she knows him to be.
    Why have you no respect for a family mourning their mother, other than trying to play a pathetic game of point scoring

    I can tell you when I lost my mother I was devastated for months, but had to continue to work soon after the funeral

    There is no place in political point scoring over a family's loss of their mother
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited September 2021
    OT party insider Kishida beat the grandstanding vaccine minister Kono in the LDP election. They do a backwards version of the Tory rules where the members vote first and if nobody gets a majority the top two choices go to the MPs. Kono won the member's section but not by enough to avoid the runoff, then the MPs picked the guy who didn't try to take away their fax machines.
  • MaxPB said:

    Graduate voting intentions from latest
    IpsosMORI political monitor
    CON 30%
    LAB 41%
    LD 12%
    GRN 6%

    That's really poor for Labour. I'd have expected Labour to be closer to 50%.
    It is higher for the conservatives than I would expect
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,992
    edited September 2021

    geoffw said:

    R4 this a.m. "Brexit paves the way for gene-edited crops"
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-58711230
    The UK government is to relax the regulation of gene-edited crops to enable commercial growing in England. European Union regulations require that gene-edited crops are treated the same as genetically-modified crops.

    These rules call for a number of field trials over a period of several years, as well as extensive food safety tests.
    The final hurdle is for member states to vote to approve a new variety.
    This approach is regarded by biotech companies as too onerous and expensive, so no genetically altered crops are developed in the European Union.
    As this is in a devolved area of policy it will be interesting to see whether the devolved administrations will follow England. Or will they stick to EU rules because they were dragged out of the EU against their will?
    That is the first proper benefit of Brexit I have seen. Moves Brexit from pointless to largely pointless from my perspective
    I think this is why we've refused to align on SPS standards.

    Food production is going to be very political in the years to come.
    Agreed. It would be sensible if the government started to soften the public up to acceptance of GM. There is massive scientific evidence that it is safe and has massive potential benefits

    The SGov will stick to EU rules because it is different from England. Nothing to do with whether it is a good policy or not.

    Wales? No idea but it is run by Corbynista Drakeford, is it not?

    On Gene Editing, and eventually GM, we need to follow the science not backwards-looking EUpolitics. It is a really positive move.
  • Mr. Mark, I didn't buy any lemonade, so maybe they are.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    And yet when you look at the Conhome polling on cabinet ministers there are 3 from ethnic minorities currently in the top 10: https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2021/09/our-cabinet-league-table-raab-plummets-from-third-from-top-in-july-to-fourth-from-bottom-last-month.html

    I don't doubt your historic experience, we saw plenty of that in the past, but the Johnson led Conservative party is far, far more representative of modern Britain than any other party.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    Good morning, everyone.



    There was no petrol at all, although this may be because there's no petrol station attached to this supermarket.

    Clearly the fault of Brexit!
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,003
    Roger said:

    The 'Not Corbyn' and 'Not Johnson Party' is not to be underestimated. If Johnson becomes as toxic as Corbyn was which is highly likely as the Brexit effect takes hold then good times could be round the corner.

    A big day for Starmer. He's definitely improving and he's got a much better back story than Corbyn which I'm sure we'll hear about today.

    I'm starting to feel optimistic.

    He's truly fucked then....
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    And yet when you look at the Conhome polling on cabinet ministers there are 3 from ethnic minorities currently in the top 10: https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2021/09/our-cabinet-league-table-raab-plummets-from-third-from-top-in-july-to-fourth-from-bottom-last-month.html

    I don't doubt your historic experience, we saw plenty of that in the past, but the Johnson led Conservative party is far, far more representative of modern Britain than any other party.
    Except perhaps in the diversity of it's views. The modern populist incarnation of the Conservative Party has little tolerance of those that do not tow the populist authoritarian line. Priti Patel demonstrates you can have a minority background but still hold the very right wing viewpoint beloved of the Daily Express.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040
    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    BoJo’s party is going to struggle to hold onto the the six seats it has in Scotland

    Is there any evidence to back up that statement ?

    Three of them look pretty safe and its also possible that there is a swing to the Conservatives in Scotland.

    Agreed. Sturgeon's administration is looking ever more inept and hapless and she herself looks worn down by an extensive period in office. The internal bickering in the SNP is becoming all the more vicious and repellent. Calling a loss or a gain for the Tories this far out is unwise. It really could go either way.
    Did someone on here mention the other day, that Alex Salmond is publishing a book of all his stories, including those he was barred from using in his defence at the enquiry?
    I don't know if it is Salmond himself or one of his henchmen. Given that Craig Murray, our former ambassador, is still in prison for expressing a view on these matters I suspect that publication of this book may prove a tad problematic. Freedom of expression really isn't a given in Scotland.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,994
    IshmaelZ said:

    Roger said:

    eek said:

    Good Morning

    The ultimate put down

    Gina Miller, businesswoman and anti-Brexit activists tweets

    'Anyone seen Boris Johnson'

    Rachel Johnson, Boris's sister replies

    'It was our Mother's funeral yesterday, Gina'

    To which I have to ask the question, why did Boris appear on TV regarding fuel issues, surely that could have been delegated...
    ....and a thousand similar questions. I'm surprised that one of the few Johnsons you could feel respect for should use this occasion to try to portray her brother as other than the amoral hedonist she knows him to be.
    Dans notre société, tout homme qui ne pleure pas à l'enterrement de sa mère risque d' être condamné à mort.

    We don't know if he did or not, but surely this once we can give him a break?
    JAMAIS! JAMAIS! JAMAIS!
  • Officials and diplomats across the European Union are getting really frustrated with the French.

    The scope of what some are calling President Emmanuel Macron’s “Europe First” strategy — which aims to make the EU more independent from Washington for defense and sensitive technologies — is causing concern in many EU member states and hampering western efforts to forge a united response to the rise of China.

    Macron’s stance has become more visible since the humiliating loss of a giant Australian submarine contract this month and has held up preparations for a crucial meeting with U.S. trade officials. The French have also blocked efforts to modernize NATO’s capabilities and fueled divisions at the top of the European Commission, according to diplomats with knowledge of those discussions.


    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-29/is-macron-straining-relations-with-europe-as-he-seeks-strategic-autonomy
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    And yet when you look at the Conhome polling on cabinet ministers there are 3 from ethnic minorities currently in the top 10: https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2021/09/our-cabinet-league-table-raab-plummets-from-third-from-top-in-july-to-fourth-from-bottom-last-month.html

    I don't doubt your historic experience, we saw plenty of that in the past, but the Johnson led Conservative party is far, far more representative of modern Britain than any other party.
    Except perhaps in the diversity of it's views. The modern populist incarnation of the Conservative Party has little tolerance of those that do not tow the populist authoritarian line. Priti Patel demonstrates you can have a minority background but still hold the very right wing viewpoint beloved of the Daily Express.
    What are you talking about? There are many MPs who objected to the (what you could call) authoritarian covid regs for starters.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,040

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    And yet when you look at the Conhome polling on cabinet ministers there are 3 from ethnic minorities currently in the top 10: https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2021/09/our-cabinet-league-table-raab-plummets-from-third-from-top-in-july-to-fourth-from-bottom-last-month.html

    I don't doubt your historic experience, we saw plenty of that in the past, but the Johnson led Conservative party is far, far more representative of modern Britain than any other party.
    Except perhaps in the diversity of it's views. The modern populist incarnation of the Conservative Party has little tolerance of those that do not tow the populist authoritarian line. Priti Patel demonstrates you can have a minority background but still hold the very right wing viewpoint beloved of the Daily Express.
    I am no fan of Patel but is she any worse than May was? I would say not. Rebalancing immigration away from a strong bias in favour of the EU to a more level playing field may prove attractive to at least some minorities.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    What evidence is there that liberally-minded people have left? I mean I know I have and I'm on the very liberal wing, but what other evidence is there?

    Pro-Europe != liberal.
    You are not liberal Philip, you are libertarian. Try and understand there is a difference. Plus you said you were resigning, so did you fib on that point? Generally those who were liberal Tories , or call them centrist if you like were not in favour of Brexit. Those in the parliamentary party had the whip withdrawn by The Clown at the behest of his puppet masters on the hard right of the party. The Tory party of today is far less diverse politically and far more to the populist right than it ever was under Margaret Thatcher
    Libertarianism is a form of liberalism. It is economic liberalism combined with social liberalism. Nothing more than that.

    You think there's a difference between resigning from the party and leaving the party? What kind of semantics game are you playing?

    Its only your closed-minded intolerance towards Brexiteers that makes you think the liberals were not in favour of Brexit. Many liberals voted for Brexit - and only die-hard Remainers who weren't prepared to accept they lost the referendum and proceed to actually leave even without a deal if need be who were kicked out.

    The Tory party of today is massively more diverse than it was under the days of Thatcher. Even if it doesn't meet your own intolerance and petty mindedness towards those who voted differently to yourself.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,746
    I wonder whether we should be thinking about 2001 as a baseline. Not a lot of people appeared to change their minds, and the main beneficiary of those who did were the smaller parties, especially the LD's.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    And yet when you look at the Conhome polling on cabinet ministers there are 3 from ethnic minorities currently in the top 10: https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2021/09/our-cabinet-league-table-raab-plummets-from-third-from-top-in-july-to-fourth-from-bottom-last-month.html

    I don't doubt your historic experience, we saw plenty of that in the past, but the Johnson led Conservative party is far, far more representative of modern Britain than any other party.
    Except perhaps in the diversity of it's views. The modern populist incarnation of the Conservative Party has little tolerance of those that do not tow the populist authoritarian line. Priti Patel demonstrates you can have a minority background but still hold the very right wing viewpoint beloved of the Daily Express.
    I am no fan of Patel but is she any worse than May was? I would say not. Rebalancing immigration away from a strong bias in favour of the EU to a more level playing field may prove attractive to at least some minorities.
    She's much better than May was. Far less intolerant towards minorities than May was.

    I don't recall Patel sending vans into minority areas screaming "GO HOME!"
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,981
    The DUP may not support the Conservatives but they probably wouldn't support a Labour-led coalition either, which gives the Tories a few extra seats to play with.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,992

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    Is there research less than a decade old on this?

    Genuine question.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    edited September 2021
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    BoJo’s party is going to struggle to hold onto the the six seats it has in Scotland

    Is there any evidence to back up that statement ?

    Three of them look pretty safe and its also possible that there is a swing to the Conservatives in Scotland.

    Agreed. Sturgeon's administration is looking ever more inept and hapless and she herself looks worn down by an extensive period in office. The internal bickering in the SNP is becoming all the more vicious and repellent. Calling a loss or a gain for the Tories this far out is unwise. It really could go either way.
    Did someone on here mention the other day, that Alex Salmond is publishing a book of all his stories, including those he was barred from using in his defence at the enquiry?
    I don't know if it is Salmond himself or one of his henchmen. Given that Craig Murray, our former ambassador, is still in prison for expressing a view on these matters I suspect that publication of this book may prove a tad problematic. Freedom of expression really isn't a given in Scotland.
    Presumably, they’ll publish it in England, and expect lots of sales in Carlisle and Berwick?

    I wonder if the large online bookseller can quickly filter out “Scotland” addresses, if told they couldn’t ship it there?

    (Memories of buying Spy Catcher on a cross-channel ferry as a teenager, in a display enscribed “The Book That’s Banned in Britain!”)
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,774
      
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    BoJo’s party is going to struggle to hold onto the the six seats it has in Scotland

    Is there any evidence to back up that statement ?

    Three of them look pretty safe and its also possible that there is a swing to the Conservatives in Scotland.

    Agreed. Sturgeon's administration is looking ever more inept and hapless and she herself looks worn down by an extensive period in office. The internal bickering in the SNP is becoming all the more vicious and repellent. Calling a loss or a gain for the Tories this far out is unwise. It really could go either way.
    Did someone on here mention the other day, that Alex Salmond is publishing a book of all his stories, including those he was barred from using in his defence at the enquiry?
    I don't know if it is Salmond himself or one of his henchmen. Given that Craig Murray, our former ambassador, is still in prison for expressing a view on these matters I suspect that publication of this book may prove a tad problematic. Freedom of expression really isn't a given in Scotland.
    Worrying

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 124,095
    edited September 2021

    HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Graduate voting intentions from latest
    IpsosMORI political monitor
    CON 30%
    LAB 41%
    LD 12%
    GRN 6%

    That's really poor for Labour. I'd have expected Labour to be closer to 50%.
    What across all graduates? Including "boomers". If that includes all age groups it feeds the narrative that if you are educated you are unlikely to vote Conservative. Not a good look for any party that should be taken seriously. Oh, hang on...Boris Johnson!
    May lost graduates too. It is partly a symptom of age eg only about 10% of over 65s are graduates compared to 40% of 18 to 24s and Labour does best amongst the young. So actually IQ wise there is probably little difference between the Conservative and Labour vote, just more graduates are now of average rather than high IQ than was the case 50 years ago.

    The last Conservative leader to win graduates was Cameron in 2015 but then he won all voters over 35 which was significantly younger than Boris and May who only won voters over 45
    Interesting, thank you. Do you have any data for further back. My instinct (possibly unconscious bias) was that back in the 80s the more educated tended to vote Tory?
    Yes but most graduates in the 1980s were still roughly in the top 10% of incomes as they were the most educated 10% of the population and therefore more likely to vote Tory anyway because they were well off.

    Since the Polys were converted to universities in the early 1990s almost half of young people now are graduates so far more will only be on average incomes or low incomes and less likely to vote Tory anyway than graduates were even without Brexit exacerbating the trend for graduates to turn away from the Tories.

    For example even in 2015 Cameron got his highest voteshare with voters earning over £70,000 but still did better with non graduates than graduates (again as he did best with older voters even if the age gap was less than now)
  • Sandpit said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    Kemi Badenock is doing an awesome job as Equalities minister, trying to promote policies that unite people, rather than divide them.

    Conservatives don’t need all-women shortlists, or discrimination by race, to end up with a diverse team of politicians in their senior ranks.
    Absolutely. The only reason you need all-women shortlists, or discrimination by race, is if you consider women or minorities to not rise to the top on their own merits.

    Simply don't be discriminatory and recognise talent and the cream reaches the top.
    Once again you show your lack of understanding. This is not born out by reality. You pretend to be liberally minded but in truth you do not have the first clue. What the Americans call "affirmative action" (which is illegal in UK - except it seems with political parties) seeks to balance opportunity in the workplace - a counter balance to the clear obstacles that stop "the cream" from reaching the top. If you think prejudice or bias, whether conscious or unconscious does not exist, you are very out of touch, or your protestations about your belief in equality are all fluff.
    "Affirmative action" is racism. Tolerating racism and fighting it with more racism just embeds and deepens racism even more and leads to others being even more racist to counter what they see as affirmative action racism. Hence you get the atrociousness that is America.

    Ending racism and judging people on their merits allows people to be judged as themselves and not their race. Hence people like Badenoch, Sunak etc getting where they are on merit not by tokenism.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 21,333
    edited September 2021

    Officials and diplomats across the European Union are getting really frustrated with the French.

    The scope of what some are calling President Emmanuel Macron’s “Europe First” strategy — which aims to make the EU more independent from Washington for defense and sensitive technologies — is causing concern in many EU member states and hampering western efforts to forge a united response to the rise of China.

    Macron’s stance has become more visible since the humiliating loss of a giant Australian submarine contract this month and has held up preparations for a crucial meeting with U.S. trade officials. The French have also blocked efforts to modernize NATO’s capabilities and fueled divisions at the top of the European Commission, according to diplomats with knowledge of those discussions.


    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-29/is-macron-straining-relations-with-europe-as-he-seeks-strategic-autonomy

    France is actually doing well.
    They saw an opportunity in Brexit and they are seizing it.

    The EU being what it is will never have a unified defence policy, but France is successfully positioning itself as head of a “coalition of the willing” that can ultimately supplant NATO which is dying on the vine.

    AUKUS was a massive setback, but watch out for increased French-India collaboration.

    France is a pivotal power in the Med (witness the recent Greek deal) and the Sahel, and a key player in the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific, and maybe even Latin America.

    Meanwhile, I still can’t work out what the actual benefit of AUKUS is for Britain.

    It feels increasingly like our only foreign policy is craven dependency on the US, which is sadly not as reliable as it once was, let alone what it might be if Trump returns in 2024.
  • HYUFD said:

    MaxPB said:

    Graduate voting intentions from latest
    IpsosMORI political monitor
    CON 30%
    LAB 41%
    LD 12%
    GRN 6%

    That's really poor for Labour. I'd have expected Labour to be closer to 50%.
    What across all graduates? Including "boomers". If that includes all age groups it feeds the narrative that if you are educated you are unlikely to vote Conservative. Not a good look for any party that should be taken seriously. Oh, hang on...Boris Johnson!
    May lost graduates too. It is partly a symptom of age eg only about 10% of over 65s are graduates compared to 40% of 18 to 24s and Labour does best amongst the young. So actually IQ wise there is probably little difference between the Conservative and Labour vote, just more graduates are now of average rather than high IQ than was the case 50 years ago.

    The last Conservative leader to win graduates was Cameron in 2015 but then he won all voters over 35 which was significantly younger than Boris and May who only won voters over 45
    Interesting, thank you. Do you have any data for further back. My instinct (possibly unconscious bias) was that back in the 80s the more educated tended to vote Tory?
    Go back to the 80s, and most big cities had an educated professional area that was reasonably reliable for the Conservatives; Sheffield Hallam or Leeds North West.
    Partly they've fallen because the demographics of the areas have changed, but there's also those sort of people are less Conservative than they used to be. Partly because so many work in the public sector.
  • DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    What evidence is there that liberally-minded people have left? I mean I know I have and I'm on the very liberal wing, but what other evidence is there?

    Pro-Europe != liberal.
    You are not liberal Philip, you are libertarian. Try and understand there is a difference. Plus you said you were resigning, so did you fib on that point? Generally those who were liberal Tories , or call them centrist if you like were not in favour of Brexit. Those in the parliamentary party had the whip withdrawn by The Clown at the behest of his puppet masters on the hard right of the party. The Tory party of today is far less diverse politically and far more to the populist right than it ever was under Margaret Thatcher
    Libertarianism is a form of liberalism. It is economic liberalism combined with social liberalism. Nothing more than that.

    You think there's a difference between resigning from the party and leaving the party? What kind of semantics game are you playing?

    Its only your closed-minded intolerance towards Brexiteers that makes you think the liberals were not in favour of Brexit. Many liberals voted for Brexit - and only die-hard Remainers who weren't prepared to accept they lost the referendum and proceed to actually leave even without a deal if need be who were kicked out.

    The Tory party of today is massively more diverse than it was under the days of Thatcher. Even if it doesn't meet your own intolerance and petty mindedness towards those who voted differently to yourself.
    I am indulging in semantics? No there is no difference between resigning or leaving a party you muppet. You said you would resign your membership. Most people would call that leaving? And yet your posts suggest you are still a member? Which is it?

    I don't have a closed minded view of "Brexiteers" as you call them. One or two who write on here make plenty of sense on most things. The amusing thing is Philip is that you are either very confused in your thinking, or you desperately wish to cover up you true nature. Your comment below about all women shortlists and "cream rises to the top" shows your true illiberalism or perhaps just ignorance.

    Anyway, enjoy the rest of your day on here Phil, I am off to do some work!
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,992
    darkage said:

    Fpt

    This isn’t just the “hard left”. Jeremy Corbyn’s appeal wasn’t just with the “hard left” it was with younger people who don’t normally pay much attention to politics.

    Those people will generally vote green without a second thought to tactical voting. Voting Green has none of the stigma that voting SWP (or even UKIP) would have and that’s why its a threat to the Labour Party.

    I would love the far left to be chucked out, and maybe it’s worth the risk as @Stuartinromford says, but to pretend that there are no downsides for Labour is difficult.

    Why do you think that Labour need the exteme minority of the far left?

    Why do you think that the Tories don't need the extreme minority of the far right?

    Kicking out the extremists, in British politics, is proven to work. No extremist party in my lifetime has ever won in the UK. The centre moves, but the far right and far left are always outsiders.
    I don’t think you’re reading my posts properly. I’m not talking about the far left.
    Yes, but everybody else is!

    Kicking out the far left is what is being spoken about. The far left should be expelled from the Labour Party every bit as ruthlessly as the far right are expelled from the Tories.

    There are zero far right MPs in the Tories. The centre right and medium right voters stick with the Tories though and centrist voters join with them too. Even some centre left join them.

    For Labour to win they don't need the far left. They need medium and centre left and centrists.

    The depends on how you define far-left and far-right.

    This man is still a Tory MP, for example.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51406407

    I never understood why this was regarded as a "far right" meeting. It makes it sound like it was a neo nazi event. People may not like it, but Victor Orban and the Law and Justice Party in Poland are part of the European political mainstream. Both are in government, and both have been welcomed on visits to the UK.

    Relevant to @OnlyLivingBoy's comment wrt Zara Sultana the other day, which I did not get round to doing the homework answer, being heavily promoted as I think a version of AOC or was it KH (?) by 'the Left'.

    Remember the Corbyn-backing commentary about "Red Tories" applied to Labour MPs attempting to shift perceptions of where the mainstream lies.
  • I’m not sure it’s been noted yet, but Dominic Cummings is recommending stockpiling a month’s worth of supplies, and getting your hands on a generator if you can find one.

    He also claims he liquidated his share holdings in mid September.

    All, this, apparently, following the example of people who were “ahead of the game on Covid”.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,992
    edited September 2021

    Officials and diplomats across the European Union are getting really frustrated with the French.

    The scope of what some are calling President Emmanuel Macron’s “Europe First” strategy — which aims to make the EU more independent from Washington for defense and sensitive technologies — is causing concern in many EU member states and hampering western efforts to forge a united response to the rise of China.

    Macron’s stance has become more visible since the humiliating loss of a giant Australian submarine contract this month and has held up preparations for a crucial meeting with U.S. trade officials. The French have also blocked efforts to modernize NATO’s capabilities and fueled divisions at the top of the European Commission, according to diplomats with knowledge of those discussions.


    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-29/is-macron-straining-relations-with-europe-as-he-seeks-strategic-autonomy

    France is actually doing well.
    They saw an opportunity in Brexit and they are seizing it.

    The EU being what it is will never have a unified defence policy, but France is successfully positioning itself as head of a “coalition of the willing” that can ultimately supplant NATO which is dying on the vine.

    AUKUS was a massive setback, but watch out for increased French-India collaboration.

    France is a pivotal power in the Med (witness the recent Greek deal) and the Sahel, and a key player in the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific, and maybe even Latin America.

    Meanwhile, I still can’t work out what the actual benefit of AUKUS is for Britain.

    It feels increasingly like our only foreign policy is craven dependency on the US, which is sadly not as reliable as it once was, let alone what it might be if Trump returns in 2024.
    How can the EU achieve what the EuCo wants to achieve without a united defence policy? It was, for example, Germany that sold China the engines for the Song Class submarines that allowed them to become a serious threat to US Carrier Groups. This is why mmany EU countries will never be on the very inside in coalitions formed involving the US for a generation or so.

    It will be interesting to see how it plays out, whether France can actually afford to subsidise it all, and how they deal with the Eastern 'wing' of the EU (will the Baltics, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic etc trust France), and Russia now having an energy noose around Europe's neck.

    That frigate order from Greece, whilst not being surprising that France won it, has come at an expensive price for France after some high speed redefinition; I reckon there is suddenly an extra 25% added value in it for Greece.

    And is the France / UK difference actually as bitter as portrayed? I can see the French Presidency bring Britain back into, for example, Galileo.
  • MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    Is there research less than a decade old on this?

    Genuine question.
    It would need to be very recent research as Conservative Party membership has trebled in the last couple of years.
  • I’m not sure it’s been noted yet, but Dominic Cummings is recommending stockpiling a month’s worth of supplies, and getting your hands on a generator if you can find one.

    He also claims he liquidated his share holdings in mid September.

    All, this, apparently, following the example of people who were “ahead of the game on Covid”.

    If he ever finds out who put these idiots in charge and encouraged the government to muck around with the UK's supply lines, I'm sure he'll want to give them a piece of his mind.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,736
    HYUFD said:

    Andy Burnham and Angela Rayner doing karaoke together at a party at the Labour conference last night

    https://twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1443059149579956228?s=20

    About time they did a double act at the head of Labour rather than the useless factional nonentity at the top now.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    MattW said:

    And is the France / UK difference actually as bitter as portrayed? I can see the French Presidency bring Britain back into, for example, Galileo.

    A lot of it is theatre, although they’ll genuinely be a little annoyed at the Aussie submarine contract.

    After next year’s election, you’ll probably see more Anglo-French co-operation on military matters, and the UK being bought into wider European programmes now that stand-offish Brexit period has passed, and these things can be looked at more dispassionately.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,981
    edited September 2021
    It seems likely the only way Labour can get into government after the next election is by doing a deal with the SNP, which will mean supporting another independence referendum in return for their support.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,791
    MattW said:

    I can see the French Presidency bring Britain back into, for example, Galileo.

    This is probably inevitable now that the British GNSS has been abandoned and the hairbrained plan for turning British Leyland in Space/OneWeb into a GNSS isn't really feasible.

    Pride will demand that it's after the current cast of characters have left the stage though.
  • On topic (before I read any of the comments), not only won't we win a majority, we shouldn't be trying to win a majority.

    What I mean by that is target the 60-70 most flippable seats that the Tories currently hold. Forget about Scotland - let the SNP take the fight to the Tories there. Likewise, let the LibDems make some inroads in the Waitrose constituencies.

    The next election is definitely a contest for who occupies No 10. We need to play smart to win it. That means ignoring target seat number 120 - because it isn't a target.

    The 60% who won't be voting for the Bozo Party deserve better.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,992
    MattW said:

    Officials and diplomats across the European Union are getting really frustrated with the French.

    The scope of what some are calling President Emmanuel Macron’s “Europe First” strategy — which aims to make the EU more independent from Washington for defense and sensitive technologies — is causing concern in many EU member states and hampering western efforts to forge a united response to the rise of China.

    Macron’s stance has become more visible since the humiliating loss of a giant Australian submarine contract this month and has held up preparations for a crucial meeting with U.S. trade officials. The French have also blocked efforts to modernize NATO’s capabilities and fueled divisions at the top of the European Commission, according to diplomats with knowledge of those discussions.


    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-29/is-macron-straining-relations-with-europe-as-he-seeks-strategic-autonomy

    France is actually doing well.
    They saw an opportunity in Brexit and they are seizing it.

    The EU being what it is will never have a unified defence policy, but France is successfully positioning itself as head of a “coalition of the willing” that can ultimately supplant NATO which is dying on the vine.

    AUKUS was a massive setback, but watch out for increased French-India collaboration.

    France is a pivotal power in the Med (witness the recent Greek deal) and the Sahel, and a key player in the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific, and maybe even Latin America.

    Meanwhile, I still can’t work out what the actual benefit of AUKUS is for Britain.

    It feels increasingly like our only foreign policy is craven dependency on the US, which is sadly not as reliable as it once was, let alone what it might be if Trump returns in 2024.
    How can the EU achieve what the EuCo wants to achieve without a united defence policy? It was, for example, Germany that sold China the engines for the Song Class submarines that allowed them to become a serious threat to US Carrier Groups. This is why many EU countries will never be on the very inside in coalitions formed involving the US for a generation or so.

    It will be interesting to see how it plays out, whether France can actually afford to subsidise it all, and how they deal with the Eastern 'wing' of the EU (will the Baltics, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic etc trust France), and Russia now having an energy noose around Europe's neck.

    That frigate order from Greece, whilst not being surprising that France won it, has come at an expensive price for France after some high speed redefinition; I reckon there is suddenly an extra 25% added value in it for Greece.

    And is the France / UK difference actually as bitter as portrayed? I can see the French Presidency bring Britain back into, for example, Galileo.
    I also heard an analyst (on France 24, I think) thinking vaguely about the future where the EU would have strong enough defence forces to stand up to the USA.

    They need to keep their feet on the ground.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 55,046
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    Officials and diplomats across the European Union are getting really frustrated with the French.

    The scope of what some are calling President Emmanuel Macron’s “Europe First” strategy — which aims to make the EU more independent from Washington for defense and sensitive technologies — is causing concern in many EU member states and hampering western efforts to forge a united response to the rise of China.

    Macron’s stance has become more visible since the humiliating loss of a giant Australian submarine contract this month and has held up preparations for a crucial meeting with U.S. trade officials. The French have also blocked efforts to modernize NATO’s capabilities and fueled divisions at the top of the European Commission, according to diplomats with knowledge of those discussions.


    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-29/is-macron-straining-relations-with-europe-as-he-seeks-strategic-autonomy

    France is actually doing well.
    They saw an opportunity in Brexit and they are seizing it.

    The EU being what it is will never have a unified defence policy, but France is successfully positioning itself as head of a “coalition of the willing” that can ultimately supplant NATO which is dying on the vine.

    AUKUS was a massive setback, but watch out for increased French-India collaboration.

    France is a pivotal power in the Med (witness the recent Greek deal) and the Sahel, and a key player in the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific, and maybe even Latin America.

    Meanwhile, I still can’t work out what the actual benefit of AUKUS is for Britain.

    It feels increasingly like our only foreign policy is craven dependency on the US, which is sadly not as reliable as it once was, let alone what it might be if Trump returns in 2024.
    How can the EU achieve what the EuCo wants to achieve without a united defence policy? It was, for example, Germany that sold China the engines for the Song Class submarines that allowed them to become a serious threat to US Carrier Groups. This is why many EU countries will never be on the very inside in coalitions formed involving the US for a generation or so.

    It will be interesting to see how it plays out, whether France can actually afford to subsidise it all, and how they deal with the Eastern 'wing' of the EU (will the Baltics, Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic etc trust France), and Russia now having an energy noose around Europe's neck.

    That frigate order from Greece, whilst not being surprising that France won it, has come at an expensive price for France after some high speed redefinition; I reckon there is suddenly an extra 25% added value in it for Greece.

    And is the France / UK difference actually as bitter as portrayed? I can see the French Presidency bring Britain back into, for example, Galileo.
    I also heard an analyst (on France 24, I think) thinking vaguely about the future where the EU would have strong enough defence forces to stand up to the USA.

    They need to keep their feet on the ground.
    Did anyone tell them that US defence spending is 4% of GDP, close to a *trillion* dollars a year?
  • Policy fail depends upon what the objectives of the policy were.

    Considering the objective seemed to be purely media spin to get the conversation moved on from the media, who had created a media-driven panic, then possibly that might be considered a[n extremely cynical] policy success?

    With over a million qualified HGV drivers in the UK alone the onus is back on employer's to offer a fair market wage to fill the vacancies, as they should. And if wages go up, HMRC gets extra taxes since IR35 means its no longer a tax dodging industry.
    So, are you suggesting that the 5000 visa policy was purely to calm things down and not really viable?
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited September 2021

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    What evidence is there that liberally-minded people have left? I mean I know I have and I'm on the very liberal wing, but what other evidence is there?

    Pro-Europe != liberal.
    You are not liberal Philip, you are libertarian. Try and understand there is a difference. Plus you said you were resigning, so did you fib on that point? Generally those who were liberal Tories , or call them centrist if you like were not in favour of Brexit. Those in the parliamentary party had the whip withdrawn by The Clown at the behest of his puppet masters on the hard right of the party. The Tory party of today is far less diverse politically and far more to the populist right than it ever was under Margaret Thatcher
    Libertarianism is a form of liberalism. It is economic liberalism combined with social liberalism. Nothing more than that.

    You think there's a difference between resigning from the party and leaving the party? What kind of semantics game are you playing?

    Its only your closed-minded intolerance towards Brexiteers that makes you think the liberals were not in favour of Brexit. Many liberals voted for Brexit - and only die-hard Remainers who weren't prepared to accept they lost the referendum and proceed to actually leave even without a deal if need be who were kicked out.

    The Tory party of today is massively more diverse than it was under the days of Thatcher. Even if it doesn't meet your own intolerance and petty mindedness towards those who voted differently to yourself.
    I am indulging in semantics? No there is no difference between resigning or leaving a party you muppet. You said you would resign your membership. Most people would call that leaving? And yet your posts suggest you are still a member? Which is it?

    I don't have a closed minded view of "Brexiteers" as you call them. One or two who write on here make plenty of sense on most things. The amusing thing is Philip is that you are either very confused in your thinking, or you desperately wish to cover up you true nature. Your comment below about all women shortlists and "cream rises to the top" shows your true illiberalism or perhaps just ignorance.

    Anyway, enjoy the rest of your day on here Phil, I am off to do some work!
    How does my post suggest I have not left, I have. I literally said that in the post you replied to "What evidence is there that liberally-minded people have left? I mean I know I have and I'm on the very liberal wing, but what other evidence is there?

    I'm not confused on my thinking, I'm economically and socially liberal. "Cream rises to the top" so long as you eliminate racism and eliminate barriers to it doing so - I've been one of the most vocal supporters of BLM etc on this site and a vehement critic of racism, but you fight racism by fighting racism. You don't fight racism by institutionalising racism. Two wrongs do not make a right.
  • Policy fail depends upon what the objectives of the policy were.

    Considering the objective seemed to be purely media spin to get the conversation moved on from the media, who had created a media-driven panic, then possibly that might be considered a[n extremely cynical] policy success?

    With over a million qualified HGV drivers in the UK alone the onus is back on employer's to offer a fair market wage to fill the vacancies, as they should. And if wages go up, HMRC gets extra taxes since IR35 means its no longer a tax dodging industry.
    So, are you suggesting that the 5000 visa policy was purely to calm things down and not really viable?
    I said so when it was announced. So yes.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,046

    Policy fail depends upon what the objectives of the policy were.

    Considering the objective seemed to be purely media spin to get the conversation moved on from the media, who had created a media-driven panic, then possibly that might be considered a[n extremely cynical] policy success?

    With over a million qualified HGV drivers in the UK alone the onus is back on employer's to offer a fair market wage to fill the vacancies, as they should. And if wages go up, HMRC gets extra taxes since IR35 means its no longer a tax dodging industry.
    So, are you suggesting that the 5000 visa policy was purely to calm things down and not really viable?
    The number alone tells you that. In any case, EU LGV driver losses made up a small fraction of the total losses. Their importance has been massively overblown for obvious reasons.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,791
    edited September 2021
    Sandpit said:

    MattW said:

    And is the France / UK difference actually as bitter as portrayed? I can see the French Presidency bring Britain back into, for example, Galileo.

    A lot of it is theatre, although they’ll genuinely be a little annoyed at the Aussie submarine contract.

    Underneath all of the bullshit drama the alignment of strategic and technical needs is still there.

    It's telling that the UK medium helicopter competition is just between two European suppliers (Airbus vs Leonardo). The MoD passes on the UH-60/SH-60 for the fifth time (to my knowledge).
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,223

    On topic (before I read any of the comments), not only won't we win a majority, we shouldn't be trying to win a majority.

    What I mean by that is target the 60-70 most flippable seats that the Tories currently hold. Forget about Scotland - let the SNP take the fight to the Tories there. Likewise, let the LibDems make some inroads in the Waitrose constituencies.

    The next election is definitely a contest for who occupies No 10. We need to play smart to win it. That means ignoring target seat number 120 - because it isn't a target.

    The 60% who won't be voting for the Bozo Party deserve better.

    I think that might be too ambitious. Seats 61-70 (okay, this includes non-Tory targets, but if we only looked at Tory seats, it would be even worse):

    61. SEDGEFIELD - 10.9 pp
    62. WEST BROMWICH WEST - 11 pp
    63. IPSWICH - 11.1 pp
    64. ALTRINCHAM AND SALE WEST - 11.2 pp
    65. BLACKPOOL SOUTH - 11.3 pp
    66. NORTHAMPTON SOUTH - 11.5 pp
    67. BOLSOVER - 11.5 pp
    68. SHIPLEY - 11.6 pp
    69. COATBRIDGE, CHRYSTON AND BELLSHILL - 11.7 pp
    70. MIDLOTHIAN - 11.8 pp

    A c.5.5-6.0 pp swing is needed to gain these.
  • Policy fail depends upon what the objectives of the policy were.

    Considering the objective seemed to be purely media spin to get the conversation moved on from the media, who had created a media-driven panic, then possibly that might be considered a[n extremely cynical] policy success?

    With over a million qualified HGV drivers in the UK alone the onus is back on employer's to offer a fair market wage to fill the vacancies, as they should. And if wages go up, HMRC gets extra taxes since IR35 means its no longer a tax dodging industry.
    So, are you suggesting that the 5000 visa policy was purely to calm things down and not really viable?
    I said so when it was announced. So yes.
    I remember thinking that 5000 was low, and the attached rules seem unfollowable.
  • Andy_JS said:

    It seems likely the only way Labour can get into government after the next election is by doing a deal with the SNP, which will mean supporting another independence referendum in return for their support.

    Yes and no. After all, the alternative for the SNP is keeping the Tories in power, whether by omission or commission. So whilst the SNP have cards to play, they're not trump cards.

    My guess is that the landing spot is Devomax with a thistle on top in 2025, with SindyRef postponed "until we've seen how that works"... so towards the end of the term.

    And the non-bonkers wing of the SNP will probably be OK with that, because the last thing they want is a referendum that they will lose.

    Yes, all this is incredibly dishonest.
  • Policy fail depends upon what the objectives of the policy were.

    Considering the objective seemed to be purely media spin to get the conversation moved on from the media, who had created a media-driven panic, then possibly that might be considered a[n extremely cynical] policy success?

    With over a million qualified HGV drivers in the UK alone the onus is back on employer's to offer a fair market wage to fill the vacancies, as they should. And if wages go up, HMRC gets extra taxes since IR35 means its no longer a tax dodging industry.
    So, are you suggesting that the 5000 visa policy was purely to calm things down and not really viable?
    I said so when it was announced. So yes.
    I remember thinking that 5000 was low, and the attached rules seem unfollowable.
    But it got the media to move on, so mission accomplished.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,746
    edited September 2021

    Policy fail depends upon what the objectives of the policy were.

    Considering the objective seemed to be purely media spin to get the conversation moved on from the media, who had created a media-driven panic, then possibly that might be considered a[n extremely cynical] policy success?

    With over a million qualified HGV drivers in the UK alone the onus is back on employer's to offer a fair market wage to fill the vacancies, as they should. And if wages go up, HMRC gets extra taxes since IR35 means its no longer a tax dodging industry.
    So, are you suggesting that the 5000 visa policy was purely to calm things down and not really viable?
    I said so when it was announced. So yes.
    I remember thinking that 5000 was low, and the attached rules seem unfollowable.
    But it got the media to move on, so mission accomplished.
    What's the phrase about 'sound and fury signifying nothing'?
  • MattWMattW Posts: 23,992

    MattW said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Yet another front that Labour is now facing is the threat to their dominance amongst ethnic minorities. This government is by far the most racially diverse we have ever had and it is not even close. The modern Conservative party has excellent role models for many ethnic minorities and has shown that there is no glass ceiling for them either.

    There are some interesting numbers in this site re the number of seats held by the respective parties and the percentage of the population that is non white: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/ge2019-how-did-demographics-affect-the-result/
    Other than 1 extreme outlier the Tories have traditionally done very badly in such seats. If that starts to change Labour are in deep trouble. And I think it will, especially with those of an Indian background. If Rishi replaces Boris those risks will be all the greater.

    Especially since the Tories don't talk down to minorities like Labour can tend to do so.

    The modern Tories are extremely comfortable with people of all races without needing to divide people against each other.
    There are of course still some not so modern Tories but they are increasingly far away from the power centre of the party. Its a very good thing.
    I think you are deluded. Mild racism and overt homophobia was rife in the Conservative Party among the more right wing of the activists when I was involved over 10 years ago. Those are the people that are still members and activists today. Most of the more liberally minded individuals have left. There is diversity in the upper echelons of the party and that is a good thing, but there is still plenty of prejudice, and while some wish to deny it the anti-EU rhetoric is essentially xenophobic in not all, but most.
    Is there research less than a decade old on this?

    Genuine question.
    It would need to be very recent research as Conservative Party membership has trebled in the last couple of years.
    Quite interested - do you have a source for Tory membership going down to 70k? I have seen speculative numbers but nothing more.

    Currently it is around 200-220k, and I'd agree with "nearly doubled".

    As to who they all are, I don't know.

    The numbers that would really interest me are 1 - Age profile, and 2 - Has there been a tilt to the Midlands / North.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,223
    https://tinyurl.com/hc58a6zv

    The Premier League has revealed that 13 of the 20 clubs in the top division have squads where fewer than 50 per cent of the players are fully vaccinated against coronavirus.

    League officials have now written directly to clubs offering a special "reward" to those who have the highest number of vaccinated players.

    Sky Sports News reported last week that most Premier League players have had at least the first Covid vaccination, though take up levels for the second jab have been disappointing.
  • Andy_JSAndy_JS Posts: 32,981
    A famous academic finding may not be true after all.

    https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/critical-thinking/dunning-kruger-effect-probably-not-real

    "The Dunning-Kruger Effect Is Probably Not Real
    The darling of those who wish to explain why incompetent people don’t know they’re unskilled, the Dunning-Kruger effect may actually just be a data artefact."
  • turbotubbsturbotubbs Posts: 17,700
    tlg86 said:

    https://tinyurl.com/hc58a6zv

    The Premier League has revealed that 13 of the 20 clubs in the top division have squads where fewer than 50 per cent of the players are fully vaccinated against coronavirus.

    League officials have now written directly to clubs offering a special "reward" to those who have the highest number of vaccinated players.

    Sky Sports News reported last week that most Premier League players have had at least the first Covid vaccination, though take up levels for the second jab have been disappointing.

    I'd beware the English language though. Most means more than 50%. I've always thought of most as 80-90%, but that is not the usage.
This discussion has been closed.