politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Analysis of the Q1 local by-elections finds CON struggling to

JosiasJessop said:

edb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Instead, it seems in your mind it is a case of rationalising renationalisation. You ask above for good arguments why they should be in private ownership, as if their natural realm is in public ownership.

Not sure about ownership but most of these things are public goods that require national coordination, especially railways. For water supply, most aspects of rail, bt openreach, and many aspects of electrical + gas, the current state is that overly fragmented private firms are managing decline by cost cutting and shirking on their commitments to improve things while a toothless regulator looks the other way.
I totally sympathise with the overly simplistic view that things can't get much worse.

"I totally sympathise with the overly simplistic view that things can't get much worse."

Wow. If you want a clue, look at a country that Corbyn has waxed lyrical about in the past (although for some strange reason not so much in the last couple of years).

Venezuela.

Things can get much, much worse.

I have no idea what you are talking about....

https://youtu.be/lxpWeUrO9k8

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

another_richard said:

DavidL said:

Posted without comment from the ONS GDP revisals yesterday:

"Construction output was estimated to have decreased by 0.1% in the fourth quarter of 2017, revised upwards from negative 0.7% in the second estimate of GDP.

With the inclusion of VAT turnover data, there have been upward revisions to construction in Quarter 1, Quarter 2 and Quarter 3 2017. This has resulted in the negative growth reported for Quarter 3 2017 in the second estimate of GDP now showing positive growth of 0.4%.

The annual growth in 2017 of 5.7% is revised upwards from the 5.1% growth reported in the second estimate of GDP and is stronger than the 3.9% growth seen in 2016. This strength reflects strong growth in construction output in late 2016 and the first quarter of 2017."

I am very surprised, however, that the BoP changes did not bring growth for Q4 back up to 0.5. It seems that there were offsetting falls in business services. Disappointing, particularly when business investment is now estimated to have grown by 2.4% last year.

At least the trade deficit fell in 2017 to its lowest as a percentage of GDP since 1998.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/d28l/pnbp

Looking at those continuous heavy trade deficits of the 2000s it should have been obvious that something wasn't quite right with the UK economy.

It wasn't that long before the 2000s that the trade data would be a major news item and bad figures worthy of political argument.

ISTR stories in the ‘80s about British Airways getting a call from No 11 asking them to delay delivery of 747s by a month or two, because at $300m each they were having a serious effect on the trade figures - figures which you correctly point out used to lead the news on the day they were released. I have no idea why they stopped reporting them, it’s unlike the media in general to shy away from bad news for the government.

The slight problem the UK has now compared to 20 or 30 years ago is that we have gone from a large net creditor to the world, where they owed us money, to a large net debtor. This is why the current account (as a percentage of GDP) in 2017 was still the fourth worst in the post-World War 2 period.

Back in the 1980s, because we had flows into the UK from the assets we held abroad, we could run a 1-1.25% trade deficit, and still have a flat current account. Now, we need to run a 1% trade surplus to achieve the same effect. (It is worth noting that weakness in sterling does ameliorate this somewhat. If sterling goes down, then the value of dividends, rent, etc, from abroad increases.)

How did we become a net debtor? That would be an interesting book.

AndyJS said:

rcs1000 said:

Sandpit said:

another_richard said:

At least the trade deficit fell in 2017 to its lowest as a percentage of GDP since 1998.

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/balanceofpayments/timeseries/d28l/pnbp

Looking at those continuous heavy trade deficits of the 2000s it should have been obvious that something wasn't quite right with the UK economy.

It wasn't that long before the 2000s that the trade data would be a major news item and bad figures worthy of political argument.

ISTR stories in the ‘80s about British Airways getting a call from No 11 asking them to delay delivery of 747s by a month or two, because at $300m each they were having a serious effect on the trade figures - figures which you correctly point out used to lead the news on the day they were released. I have no idea why they stopped reporting them, it’s unlike the media in general to shy away from bad news for the government.

The slight problem the UK has now compared to 20 or 30 years ago is that we have gone from a large net creditor to the world, where they owed us money, to a large net debtor. This is why the current account (as a percentage of GDP) in 2017 was still the fourth worst in the post-World War 2 period.

Back in the 1980s, because we had flows into the UK from the assets we held abroad, we could run a 1-1.25% trade deficit, and still have a flat current account. Now, we need to run a 1% trade surplus to achieve the same effect. (It is worth noting that weakness in sterling does ameliorate this somewhat. If sterling goes down, then the value of dividends, rent, etc, from abroad increases.)

How did we become a net debtor? That would be an interesting book.

We consumed more wealth than we created.

Governments encouraged this as it made people happy and so more likely to re-elect them.

AndyJS said:

How did we become a net debtor? That would be an interesting book.

That is the inevitable consequence of running current account deficits year after year. If we spend more than we earn, the money has to come from either selling assets or borrowing.

The UK’s net international investment position (NIIP) has been deteriorating for a very long time.

When we were the only industrial power, much of the profits were invested overseas. The U.K. became a nation with vast overseas assets. The income from these assets meant that we could have a higher standard of living than other nations, even if we were less productive overall.

Britain’s poor productivity was revealed in the two world wars. While we were capable of devoting a larger share of our economy to war production than the Germans, this was only at the cost of liquidating a large share of our overseas investments and consuming the wealth. This meant that if our productivity remained the same post-war, we would be poorer overall, as we would receive less income from overseas. The Atlee Government realised this very quickly.

Other structural changes have made things worse, in particular the shift from energy independence to import dependence (with the exception of the North Sea from 1980-2010).

The greatest fallacy of post 80s politics is that foreign ownership doesn’t matter. It most certainly does.

rcs1000 said:

edb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Instead, it seems in your mind it is a case of rationalising renationalisation. You ask above for good arguments why they should be in private ownership, as if their natural realm is in public ownership.

Not sure about ownership but most of these things are public goods that require national coordination, especially railways. For water supply, most aspects of rail, bt openreach, and many aspects of electrical + gas, the current state is that overly fragmented private firms are managing decline by cost cutting and shirking on their commitments to improve things while a toothless regulator looks the other way.
I totally sympathise with the overly simplistic view that things can't get much worse.

I live in Los Angeles. The service of nationalised utilities here is an order of magnitude worse than of privatized ones in the UK. When we first came here, we didn't have hot water for 10 days because that's when the first "slot" for a turn on was.

It's clever of Corbyn, having sewn up the youth vote, to go after us oldies who remember with nostalgia the good old days of the nationalised utilities and feel the bitter regret and shame of having voted them out of existence.

Leedsprinter said:

rcs1000 said:

edb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Instead, it seems in your mind it is a case of rationalising renationalisation. You ask above for good arguments why they should be in private ownership, as if their natural realm is in public ownership.

Not sure about ownership but most of these things are public goods that require national coordination, especially railways. For water supply, most aspects of rail, bt openreach, and many aspects of electrical + gas, the current state is that overly fragmented private firms are managing decline by cost cutting and shirking on their commitments to improve things while a toothless regulator looks the other way.
I totally sympathise with the overly simplistic view that things can't get much worse.

I live in Los Angeles. The service of nationalised utilities here is an order of magnitude worse than of privatized ones in the UK. When we first came here, we didn't have hot water for 10 days because that's when the first "slot" for a turn on was.

It's clever of Corbyn, having sewn up the youth vote, to go after us oldies who remember with nostalgia the good old days of the nationalised utilities and feel the bitter regret and shame of having voted them out of existence.

Yeah, he should campaign to reinstate the closed shop too.

geoffw said:

rottenborough said:

Leedsprinter said:

rcs1000 said:

edb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Instead, it seems in your mind it is a case of rationalising renationalisation. You ask above for good arguments why they should be in private ownership, as if their natural realm is in public ownership.

Not sure about ownership but most of these things are public goods that require national coordination, especially railways. For water supply, most aspects of rail, bt openreach, and many aspects of electrical + gas, the current state is that overly fragmented private firms are managing decline by cost cutting and shirking on their commitments to improve things while a toothless regulator looks the other way.
I totally sympathise with the overly simplistic view that things can't get much worse.

I live in Los Angeles. The service of nationalised utilities here is an order of magnitude worse than of privatized ones in the UK. When we first came here, we didn't have hot water for 10 days because that's when the first "slot" for a turn on was.

It's clever of Corbyn, having sewn up the youth vote, to go after us oldies who remember with nostalgia the good old days of the nationalised utilities and feel the bitter regret and shame of having voted them out of existence.

...and now he's going after the Jewish vote. Talk about nerve.

https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/979689698665926656

Oh the sincerity! You can see it in his eyes.

I think I can hazard a guess as to how this has gone down in some communities.

JosiasJessop said:

Off-topic:

This week the Rail Accident Investigation Branch gave Network Rail urgent safety advice, about the 'quality' of their works.

This is typified by the following incident:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-43459118

Bloody lucky.

Anyone who thinks 'ownership structures' are a solution should remember that Network Rail is nationalised. And failing.

They are clearly not a silver bullet, but if we sell an ever-greater share of the assets of this country to foreign investors while failing to invest equivalent sums overseas, we will eventually end up as tenants in our own country.

We should demand reciprocity - you can invest in our infrastructure if we can invest in yours.

I’d also note that Network Rail has the best safety record of any of the large European rail networks.

RoyalBlue said:

The UK’s net international investment position (NIIP) has been deteriorating for a very long time.

When we were the only industrial power, much of the profits were invested overseas. The U.K. became a nation with vast overseas assets. The income from these assets meant that we could have a higher standard of living than other nations, even if we were less productive overall.

Britain’s poor productivity was revealed in the two world wars. While we were capable of devoting a larger share of our economy to war production than the Germans, this was only at the cost of liquidating a large share of our overseas investments and consuming the wealth. This meant that if our productivity remained the same post-war, we would be poorer overall, as we would receive less income from overseas. The Atlee Government realised this very quickly.

Other structural changes have made things worse, in particular the shift from energy independence to import dependence (with the exception of the North Sea from 1980-2010).

The greatest fallacy of post 80s politics is that foreign ownership doesn’t matter. It most certainly does.

I think it's a bit more complicated than that. The problem, at heart, is that we spend more than we earn, and we have funded this by borrowing from abroad. The sale of, for example, ARM barely matters, and is matched by British firms acquiring overseas ones.

AndyJS said:

Mehdi Hasan in the New Statesman:

"The sorry truth is that the virus of anti-Semitism has infected the British Muslim community

It's a shameful fact that Muslims are not only the victims of racial and religious prejudice but purveyors of it, too."

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2013/03/sorry-truth-virus-anti-semitism-has-infected-british-muslim-community

Good for him for calling this out. And it's not just anti-Semitism. Sexism and homophobia is rife among many British Muslims. Unfortunately, the people who traditionally care about combatting prejudice often give us brown people a pass. I don't think it will really change until we get much better integration and more mixing between faith communities.

geoffw said:

rottenborough said:

Leedsprinter said:

rcs1000 said:

edb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Instead, it seems in your mind it is a case of rationalising renationalisation. You ask above for good arguments why they should be in private ownership, as if their natural realm is in public ownership.

Not sure about ownership but most of these things are public goods that require national coordination, especially railways. For water supply, most aspects of rail, bt openreach, and many aspects of electrical + gas, the current state is that overly fragmented private firms are managing decline by cost cutting and shirking on their commitments to improve things while a toothless regulator looks the other way.
I totally sympathise with the overly simplistic view that things can't get much worse.

I live in Los Angeles. The service of nationalised utilities here is an order of magnitude worse than of privatized ones in the UK. When we first came here, we didn't have hot water for 10 days because that's when the first "slot" for a turn on was.

It's clever of Corbyn, having sewn up the youth vote, to go after us oldies who remember with nostalgia the good old days of the nationalised utilities and feel the bitter regret and shame of having voted them out of existence.

...and now he's going after the Jewish vote. Talk about nerve.

https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/979689698665926656

Oh the sincerity! You can see it in his eyes.

Has he ever issued Passover messages before? I'm guessing not.

Corbyn needs to be punched, quite a lot, and quite forcefully. I can't actually believe he is lying in his intent, but from that video he seems to be an exemplar of precisely that.

What a complete c the man is.

rcs1000 said:

RoyalBlue said:

The UK’s net international investment position (NIIP) has been deteriorating for a very long time.

When we were the only industrial power, much of the profits were invested overseas. The U.K. became a nation with vast overseas assets. The income from these assets meant that we could have a higher standard of living than other nations, even if we were less productive overall.

Britain’s poor productivity was revealed in the two world wars. While we were capable of devoting a larger share of our economy to war production than the Germans, this was only at the cost of liquidating a large share of our overseas investments and consuming the wealth. This meant that if our productivity remained the same post-war, we would be poorer overall, as we would receive less income from overseas. The Atlee Government realised this very quickly.

Other structural changes have made things worse, in particular the shift from energy independence to import dependence (with the exception of the North Sea from 1980-2010).

The greatest fallacy of post 80s politics is that foreign ownership doesn’t matter. It most certainly does.

I think it's a bit more complicated than that. The problem, at heart, is that we spend more than we earn, and we have funded this by borrowing from abroad. The sale of, for example, ARM barely matters, and is matched by British firms acquiring overseas ones.

It is of course more complicated, but it is the sale of assets that has funded our overconsumption far more than debt. Foreign ownership of gilts, for instance, only took off from 2003.

Elliot said:

Russia goes well beyond tit-for-tat expulsions in response to the UK:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43596812

Time to start targeting their money, I think.

Is there convention for how many 'diplomats' a country can have in another country? How are they registered?

Elliot said:

Russia goes well beyond tit-for-tat expulsions in response to the UK:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43596812

Time to start targeting their money, I think.

So in reality someone else's money that has found its way into their hands. There are very few Russian businessmen, and there are very many Russian crooks.

rottenborough said:

Omnium said:

geoffw said:

rottenborough said:

Leedsprinter said:

rcs1000 said:

edb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Instead, it seems in your mind it is a case of rationalising renationalisation. You ask above for good arguments why they should be in private ownership, as if their natural realm is in public ownership.

Not sure about ownership but most of these things are public goods that require national coordination, especially railways. For water supply, most aspects of rail, bt openreach, and many aspects of electrical + gas, the current state is that overly fragmented private firms are managing decline by cost cutting and shirking on their commitments to improve things while a toothless regulator looks the other way.
I totally sympathise with the overly simplistic view that things can't get much worse.

I live in Los Angeles. The service of nationalised utilities here is an order of magnitude worse than of privatized ones in the UK. When we first came here, we didn't have hot water for 10 days because that's when the first "slot" for a turn on was.

It's clever of Corbyn, having sewn up the youth vote, to go after us oldies who remember with nostalgia the good old days of the nationalised utilities and feel the bitter regret and shame of having voted them out of existence.

...and now he's going after the Jewish vote. Talk about nerve.

https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/979689698665926656

Oh the sincerity! You can see it in his eyes.

Has he ever issued Passover messages before? I'm guessing not.

Corbyn needs to be punched, quite a lot, and quite forcefully. I can't actually believe he is lying in his intent, but from that video he seems to be an exemplar of precisely that.

What a complete c the man is.

Tweeters claim he has never done a Passover before.

The cult have responded that that is fake news, he does it every year etc etc.

It should be fairly easy to prove one way or another.

FrancisUrquhart said:

rottenborough said:

Omnium said:

geoffw said:

rottenborough said:

Leedsprinter said:

rcs1000 said:

edb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Instead, it seems in your mind it is a case of rationalising renationalisation. You ask above for good arguments why they should be in private ownership, as if their natural realm is in public ownership.

Not sure about ownership but most of these things are public goods that require national coordination, especially railways. For water supply, most aspects of rail, bt openreach, and many aspects of electrical + gas, the current state is that overly fragmented private firms are managing decline by cost cutting and shirking on their commitments to improve things while a toothless regulator looks the other way.
I totally sympathise with the overly simplistic view that things can't get much worse.

I live in Los Angeles. The service of nationalised utilities here is an order of magnitude worse than of privatized ones in the UK. When we first came here, we didn't have hot water for 10 days because that's when the first "slot" for a turn on was.

It's clever of Corbyn, having sewn up the youth vote, to go after us oldies who remember with nostalgia the good old days of the nationalised utilities and feel the bitter regret and shame of having voted them out of existence.

...and now he's going after the Jewish vote. Talk about nerve.

https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/979689698665926656

Oh the sincerity! You can see it in his eyes.

Has he ever issued Passover messages before? I'm guessing not.

Corbyn needs to be punched, quite a lot, and quite forcefully. I can't actually believe he is lying in his intent, but from that video he seems to be an exemplar of precisely that.

What a complete c the man is.

Tweeters claim he has never done a Passover before.

The cult have responded that that is fake news, he does it every year etc etc.

It should be fairly easy to prove one way or another.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/10/labour-left-antisemitism-jeremy-corbyn-israel - evidence of at least one previous message. But whether one has been done as a video before proving harder to track down. But it looks like he has 'self-censored' in the past to avoid upsetting his Palestinian friends

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

So much for the militant anti semite then

JosiasJessop said:

RoyalBlue said:

JosiasJessop said:

Off-topic:

This week the Rail Accident Investigation Branch gave Network Rail urgent safety advice, about the 'quality' of their works.

This is typified by the following incident:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-43459118

Bloody lucky.

Anyone who thinks 'ownership structures' are a solution should remember that Network Rail is nationalised. And failing.

They are clearly not a silver bullet, but if we sell an ever-greater share of the assets of this country to foreign investors while failing to invest equivalent sums overseas, we will eventually end up as tenants in our own country.

We should demand reciprocity - you can invest in our infrastructure if we can invest in yours.

I’d also note that Network Rail has the best safety record of any of the large European rail networks.

Indeed, as I and others have commented on in the past. But they are utterly failing on enhancements (just look at the Great Western electrification fiasco, or the delays just announced on the Blackpool line works). Worse, they are also failing on renewals which, along with maintenance, is their bread-and-butter work.

And just look at that photo. This should have been detected at several levels: at the very least the PICOW (Person In Charge Of Work) should have seen it. Yet the line was handed back to service trains with the end of a redundant rail lying on the running rail.

I want what works (tm). And the current nationalised Network Rail does not bode well for a future nationalised operations company.

Ownership is largely irrelevant. What matters is what works. That might be privatised; it might be nationalised, or it might be a combination. But you must start with what what you want to achieve, and work from that. And that start point is not an ownership structure.

Assuming you have a private pension, your ownership of assets and the resulting dividend flows will be quite relevant in retirement. It is the same for the nation as a whole.

Nationalisation is clearly only one solution, and the managerial problems you highlight are important, but the private sector is not perfect.

The real problems are low productivity, overconsumption and insufficient saving.

JosiasJessop said:

Elliot said:

Russia goes well beyond tit-for-tat expulsions in response to the UK:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43596812

Time to start targeting their money, I think.

Is there convention for how many 'diplomats' a country can have in another country? How are they registered?

The Vienna Convention seems to be the document that covers consular relations.
http://www.ediplomat.com/nd/treaties/consular_relations.htm

Basically, the number of embassies, consular offices and diplomats are mutually agreed, and the names are notified to the receiving country - which has the right to declare them non-grata at their own discretion.

What generally happens in practice is that most of the expelled diplomats are usually replaced with others. We’ll probably let in a load more Russian spies diplomats, if only to protect the spying diplomacy we are doing in Russia. Hopefully we will keep a very watchful eye on them.

Floater said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

So much for the militant anti semite then

That is ambiguous. Do you mean, 'this proves he is not a militant anti Semite,' or, 'this proves he is?'

MarqueeMark said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

There's going to be some fascinating discussions between Labour MPs from now until their return to Westminster. Will it amount to anything? Who knows. But it is their last chance. Being widely flagged as now sitting representing an anti-semitic party is surely the ultimate thing these so-far supine MPs cannot acquiesce in. If they don't take this opportunity to require drastic change - and that means widespread exclusons - then the party will rightly deserve the tag of being the plaything of the thick, the mouthy, the ignorant of history and the downright malevolent.

It's also going to be interesting to see how Christians in the Labour party respond.

AnneJGP said:

MarqueeMark said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

There's going to be some fascinating discussions between Labour MPs from now until their return to Westminster. Will it amount to anything? Who knows. But it is their last chance. Being widely flagged as now sitting representing an anti-semitic party is surely the ultimate thing these so-far supine MPs cannot acquiesce in. If they don't take this opportunity to require drastic change - and that means widespread exclusons - then the party will rightly deserve the tag of being the plaything of the thick, the mouthy, the ignorant of history and the downright malevolent.

It's also going to be interesting to see how Christians in the Labour party respond.

Well indeed. Not sure if there is still much of a Chapel tradtion in Labour (in a non-Trade Union sense of the word), but those that are must be appalled.

ydoethur said:

Floater said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

So much for the militant anti semite then

That is ambiguous. Do you mean, 'this proves he is not a militant anti Semite,' or, 'this proves he is?'

I believe he has claimed he is a militant anti semite in response to the shit storm

this rather shows the lie

MarqueeMark said:

AnneJGP said:

MarqueeMark said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

There's going to be some fascinating discussions between Labour MPs from now until their return to Westminster. Will it amount to anything? Who knows. But it is their last chance. Being widely flagged as now sitting representing an anti-semitic party is surely the ultimate thing these so-far supine MPs cannot acquiesce in. If they don't take this opportunity to require drastic change - and that means widespread exclusons - then the party will rightly deserve the tag of being the plaything of the thick, the mouthy, the ignorant of history and the downright malevolent.

It's also going to be interesting to see how Christians in the Labour party respond.

Well indeed. Not sure if there is still much of a Chapel tradtion in Labour (in a non-Trade Union sense of the word), but those that are must be appalled.

It now owes more to McCluskey than to Methodism?

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

AnneJGP said:

MarqueeMark said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

There's going to be some fascinating discussions between Labour MPs from now until their return to Westminster. Will it amount to anything? Who knows. But it is their last chance. Being widely flagged as now sitting representing an anti-semitic party is surely the ultimate thing these so-far supine MPs cannot acquiesce in. If they don't take this opportunity to require drastic change - and that means widespread exclusons - then the party will rightly deserve the tag of being the plaything of the thick, the mouthy, the ignorant of history and the downright malevolent.

It's also going to be interesting to see how Christians in the Labour party respond.

Well indeed. Not sure if there is still much of a Chapel tradtion in Labour (in a non-Trade Union sense of the word), but those that are must be appalled.

It now owes more to McCluskey than to Methodism?

Please don’t tar Methodism by association with the contemporary Labour Party.

RoyalBlue said:

ydoethur said:

MarqueeMark said:

AnneJGP said:

MarqueeMark said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

There's going to be some fascinating discussions between Labour MPs from now until their return to Westminster. Will it amount to anything? Who knows. But it is their last chance. Being widely flagged as now sitting representing an anti-semitic party is surely the ultimate thing these so-far supine MPs cannot acquiesce in. If they don't take this opportunity to require drastic change - and that means widespread exclusons - then the party will rightly deserve the tag of being the plaything of the thick, the mouthy, the ignorant of history and the downright malevolent.

It's also going to be interesting to see how Christians in the Labour party respond.

Well indeed. Not sure if there is still much of a Chapel tradtion in Labour (in a non-Trade Union sense of the word), but those that are must be appalled.

It now owes more to McCluskey than to Methodism?

Please don’t tar Methodism by association with the contemporary Labour Party.

I wouldn't say that any particular denomination is 'associated' with any political party nowadays, but it is my experience that many Christians are a little left-wing. Shall we say, they find more to complain about in a Conservative government than a Labour government. I haven't heard any reactions from Christian circles yet to all these accusations of anti-semitism, that's all.

Elliot said:

Russia goes well beyond tit-for-tat expulsions in response to the UK:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43596812

Time to start targeting their money, I think.

Interesting to note which countries *haven’t* expelled diplomats. Portugal, Bulgaria, Malta, Greece, Austria, Slovakia are the ones I’ve spotted.

Canada and Australia are the only two non-European countries. New Zealand claims it would have expelled a spy if it could have identified one.

ydoethur said:

The BBC didn't quite think this headline through:

Corbyn: Labour must do better on anti-Semitism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43597132

Yet more evidence of the BBC’s right-wing pro-Brexit bias.

ydoethur said:

The BBC didn't quite think this headline through:

Corbyn: Labour must do better on anti-Semitism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43597132

BBC bias, dontcha know?

DavidL said:

Sean_F said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Filthy day, hours still to TMS and admin work to do... tim on twitter vs some corbynites is an excellent read! David Herdson trying to educate him...

https://twitter.com/Mathewdcx/status/979752443562127360

LOL...Tim will be hopping mad at being called a Tory.

He's New Labour. They're all Tories to the Fascists Weirdos Jezziahrites.

This is getting truly surreal.

He described as a typical Tory boy.

I can only presume the prat is taking his name seriously and either hasn’t or is incapable of reading Tim’s posts.

Addressing things as they actually are takes time no one has thesedays. I haven't read a single post on here in years, my responses are simply best guesses based on what I think the poster in question is probably on about.

Gardenwalker said:

Elliot said:

Russia goes well beyond tit-for-tat expulsions in response to the UK:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43596812

Time to start targeting their money, I think.

Interesting to note which countries *haven’t* expelled diplomats. Portugal, Bulgaria, Malta, Greece, Austria, Slovakia are the ones I’ve spotted.

Canada and Australia are the only two non-European countries. New Zealand claims it would have expelled a spy if it could have identified one.

Too busy pissing themselves laughing at our cricket team.

RoyalBlue said:

ydoethur said:

The BBC didn't quite think this headline through:

Corbyn: Labour must do better on anti-Semitism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43597132

Yet more evidence of the BBC’s right-wing pro-Brexit bias.

BOURGEOIS BROADCASTING COMPANY!

BTW, Greetings from Liverpool

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

The BBC didn't quite think this headline through:

Corbyn: Labour must do better on anti-Semitism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43597132

It’s a little unfair. Corbyn has been trying really hard for years. He’s just thick.

Being fair for a moment, assuming Corbyn does not share the view of some of his supporters that the 'whole' row has just been stirred up to attack him, and assuming for the sake of argument that he is as committed to stamping this sort of thing out as he says he is, he must be extremely confused as to how it keeps popping and being sustained. Why does he think they have been having such problems, given they have such a commitment against anti-semitism?

His previous comment that left wing antisemitism is somehow harder to spot than good old fashioned right wing antisemitism I think can be ignored

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

The BBC didn't quite think this headline through:

Corbyn: Labour must do better on anti-Semitism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43597132

It’s a little unfair. Corbyn has been trying really hard for years. He’s just thick.

Being fair for a moment, assuming Corbyn does not share the view of some of his supporters that the 'whole' row has just been stirred up to attack him, and assuming for the sake of argument that he is as committed to stamping this sort of thing out as he says he is, he must be extremely confused as to how it keeps popping and being sustained. Why does he think they have been having such problems, given they have such a commitment against anti-semitism?

His previous comment that left wing antisemitism is somehow harder to spot than good old fashioned right wing antisemitism I think can be ignored

May I refer the honourable member to my previous answer.

FrancisUrquhart said:

rottenborough said:

Omnium said:

geoffw said:

rottenborough said:

Leedsprinter said:

rcs1000 said:

edb said:

JosiasJessop said:

Instead, it seems in your mind it is a case of rationalising renationalisation. You ask above for good arguments why they should be in private ownership, as if their natural realm is in public ownership.

Not sure about ownership but most of these things are public goods that require national coordination, especially railways. For water supply, most aspects of rail, bt openreach, and many aspects of electrical + gas, the current state is that overly fragmented private firms are managing decline by cost cutting and shirking on their commitments to improve things while a toothless regulator looks the other way.
I totally sympathise with the overly simplistic view that things can't get much worse.

I live in Los Angeles. The service of nationalised utilities here is an order of magnitude worse than of privatized ones in the UK. When we first came here, we didn't have hot water for 10 days because that's when the first "slot" for a turn on was.

It's clever of Corbyn, having sewn up the youth vote, to go after us oldies who remember with nostalgia the good old days of the nationalised utilities and feel the bitter regret and shame of having voted them out of existence.

...and now he's going after the Jewish vote. Talk about nerve.

https://twitter.com/jeremycorbyn/status/979689698665926656

Oh the sincerity! You can see it in his eyes.

Has he ever issued Passover messages before? I'm guessing not.

Corbyn needs to be punched, quite a lot, and quite forcefully. I can't actually believe he is lying in his intent, but from that video he seems to be an exemplar of precisely that.

What a complete c the man is.

Tweeters claim he has never done a Passover before.

The cult have responded that that is fake news, he does it every year etc etc.

It should be fairly easy to prove one way or another.

Can't find one on Youtube.

kle4 said:

DavidL said:

ydoethur said:

The BBC didn't quite think this headline through:

Corbyn: Labour must do better on anti-Semitism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43597132

It’s a little unfair. Corbyn has been trying really hard for years. He’s just thick.

Being fair for a moment, assuming Corbyn does not share the view of some of his supporters that the 'whole' row has just been stirred up to attack him, and assuming for the sake of argument that he is as committed to stamping this sort of thing out as he says he is, he must be extremely confused as to how it keeps popping and being sustained. Why does he think they have been having such problems, given they have such a commitment against anti-semitism?

His previous comment that left wing antisemitism is somehow harder to spot than good old fashioned right wing antisemitism I think can be ignored

monkey see, monkey don't do - just damned obstinate

Maybe we could solve the problem by implementing all non-anti-semite shortlists?

ydoethur said:

The BBC didn't quite think this headline through:

Corbyn: Labour must do better on anti-Semitism
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-43597132

Easy mistake to make ...... looking at my post below :-)

ReggieCide said:

Floater said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Floater said:

ydoethur said:

Floater said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

So much for the militant anti semite then

That is ambiguous. Do you mean, 'this proves he is not a militant anti Semite,' or, 'this proves he is?'

I believe he has claimed he is a militant anti semite in response to the shit storm

this rather shows the lie

anti-anti-semite.

yep - just noticed my mistake

Still - no one would expect militant anti semitism in Labour right.......

Should that not be anti antisemitism? And where does "militant" fit in? I though they'd been superseded by momentum or is that militant momentum?

Is there a quiz on this at the end of the night?

This is the kind of person who will win more votes for the Tories IMO (at least from my reading of this piece anyway): https://www.newstatesman.com/spotlight/skills/2018/03/what-have-conservatives-ever-done-young-people?amp#click=https://t.co/zXhC2sZPUU

SandyRentool said:

Maybe we could solve the problem by implementing all non-anti-semite shortlists?

Non-Twitter User shortlists might be a sensible first step.....

DavidL said:

ReggieCide said:

Floater said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Floater said:

ydoethur said:

Floater said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

So much for the militant anti semite then

That is ambiguous. Do you mean, 'this proves he is not a militant anti Semite,' or, 'this proves he is?'

I believe he has claimed he is a militant anti semite in response to the shit storm

this rather shows the lie

anti-anti-semite.

yep - just noticed my mistake

Still - no one would expect militant anti semitism in Labour right.......

Should that not be anti antisemitism? And where does "militant" fit in? I though they'd been superseded by momentum or is that militant momentum?

Is there a quiz on this at the end of the night?

when i was a callow youth I used to worry about anti missile missiles and wondered if the response should be to make anti anti missile missiles but I decided that, because of time constraint, you'd have to launch the anti anti missile missile before the missile was launched. I came close to being sectioned but then I saw Dr Strangelove.

FrancisUrquhart said:

A UK soldier has been killed in combat in Syria, the Ministry of Defence has said.
The serviceman - embedded with US forces as part of a counter-terrorism operation against the Islamic State group - was killed on Thursday by an improvised explosive device.

RIP.

SeanT said:

Just realised, re the new Corbynite Labour Jew Hating and Socialist Party, there is a truly bizarre historic echo from across the pond.

That is to say, if we had a kind of British Senator McCarthy accusing the communists of infiltrating our democracy, taking over a major party, & actively seeking to harm the country, HE WOULD BE RIGHT.

Nah, it would be a plot by his enemies to discredit Corbyn by falsely portraying him as an anti-Semite.

The Jews would be behind it, of course, as they dislike him...

DavidL said:

ReggieCide said:

Floater said:

Ishmael_Z said:

Floater said:

ydoethur said:

Floater said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

So much for the militant anti semite then

That is ambiguous. Do you mean, 'this proves he is not a militant anti Semite,' or, 'this proves he is?'

I believe he has claimed he is a militant anti semite in response to the shit storm

this rather shows the lie

anti-anti-semite.

yep - just noticed my mistake

Still - no one would expect militant anti semitism in Labour right.......

Should that not be anti antisemitism? And where does "militant" fit in? I though they'd been superseded by momentum or is that militant momentum?

Is there a quiz on this at the end of the night?

If there is i'm not fancying my chances ;-)

SeanT said:

MarqueeMark said:

AnneJGP said:

MarqueeMark said:

rottenborough said:

https://twitter.com/peterkyle/status/979754903777300480

There's going to be some fascinating discussions between Labour MPs from now until their return to Westminster. Will it amount to anything? Who knows. But it is their last chance. Being widely flagged as now sitting representing an anti-semitic party is surely the ultimate thing these so-far supine MPs cannot acquiesce in. If they don't take this opportunity to require drastic change - and that means widespread exclusons - then the party will rightly deserve the tag of being the plaything of the thick, the mouthy, the ignorant of history and the downright malevolent.

It's also going to be interesting to see how Christians in the Labour party respond.

Well indeed. Not sure if there is still much of a Chapel tradtion in Labour (in a non-Trade Union sense of the word), but those that are must be appalled.

Hey Mark

Culinary advice needed: IIRC you were at Gidleigh :Park recently and thought it awful. I'm doing a Times piece there in two weeks and hosting my elderly dad and spouse for dinner (so I will be be paying for part of it! - the horror)

Any advice? Tasting menu? A La Carte? It's bloody pricey and I don't want to waste money.

It's such a shame the last guy left, he was brilliant. This new guy is a scion of Nathan Outlaw but if you are right he's not a chip off the old block.

What should I order? Tripadvisor is opaque.

Hmmmmmm..... Went early on in the new guys regime and it was underwhelming. Had
friends who went later and stayed - and they were really underwhelmed. I'd go a la carte for sure. And hope....

(The good news is I chatted to Michael Wignall today - he's getting his new venture together. Yay! Also, if you are in the Midlands, had a really great meal at a little place called Chealls in Henley-in-Arden. Wife and I both thought it was great. A young chef to watch out for.)