Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

Sunak sees huge “Next PM” betting boost after his budget – politicalbetting.com

SystemSystem Posts: 11,007
edited March 2021 in General
imageSunak sees huge “Next PM” betting boost after his budget – politicalbetting.com

Betdata.io chart of Betfair market

Read the full story here

«1345678

Comments

  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    edited March 2021
    First....like England wicket already....
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    And 2nd....like the England wicket falling.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,222
    Second, and time to lay
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    If this test match goes 3 days it will be a miracle.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,187

    If this test match goes 3 days it will be a miracle.

    I doubt India will play Root as badly as they did in their first innings in the last test.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    tlg86 said:

    If this test match goes 3 days it will be a miracle.

    I doubt India will play Root as badly as they did in their first innings in the last test.
    I meant more England 20 wickets won't last 2 days...India might decide to drag it out and score 600 in between, probably depends on what the Indian bookmakers have the spreads set at.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,274
    And 3rd wicket gone.....
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,242
    edited March 2021
    It is obvious that Rishi Sunak will be next Prime Minister now he has followed the Corbynite agenda of moving civil servants north, furlough and the green industrial revolution, although his increasing corporation tax to 25 per cent falls short of Labour's 26!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/03/03/rishi-sunaks-budget-used-john-mcdonnells-ideas-says-jeremy-corbyn/ (£££)
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,222
    It was bad enough when cricket was confined to daytimes in the summer.
  • Options
    DecrepiterJohnLDecrepiterJohnL Posts: 24,242
    On OGH's point in the header about Boris not leading the Conservatives into the next election, I am reminded he needed to be persuaded to run for a second term as London Mayor, though of course it is hard to be sure how much was due to boredom and how much to ambition to succeed Cameron in Number 10.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    The only chance England have from here is if India have to forfeit.
  • Options
    FenmanFenman Posts: 1,047
    Can Sunak play Cricket?
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,397
    edited March 2021
    About 10th.

    FPT: Would there be problems with a lower CT rate in Northern Ireland than the rest of the UK?
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,397
    Hmmm. Hunt vs Sunak.
  • Options
    philiphphiliph Posts: 4,704
    MattW said:

    Hmmm. Hunt vs Sunak.

    Only one winner of that contest.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    philiph said:

    MattW said:

    Hmmm. Hunt vs Sunak.

    Only one winner of that contest.
    You’re right, people who raise taxes don’t win Tory leadership contests.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,628
    edited March 2021
    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Royals = big press. Even the publicly funded bits cannot help themselves.

    Honestly the whole thing is just a nonsense - clearly there have been leaks against Harry and Meghan in recent days no doubt because of their interview, but equally clearly you cant expect a great deal of sympathy when your whole deal appears to be complaining about media attention and royal status whilst making use of both of those things.

    If you are happier out of it, fine. If you have takes to tell, just do it already not this orchestrated media game of hints and clips and build up. That just makes it look like it's not important to them. And the rest of the royals can remember that playing things with a straight bat is preferable - just ignore it, as getting engaged will only rebound.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,628

    It is obvious that Rishi Sunak will be next Prime Minister now he has followed the Corbynite agenda of moving civil servants north, furlough and the green industrial revolution, although his increasing corporation tax to 25 per cent falls short of Labour's 26!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/03/03/rishi-sunaks-budget-used-john-mcdonnells-ideas-says-jeremy-corbyn/ (£££)

    Ideas taken up in one circumstance doesnt prove it would be appropriate in another. Lockdown has been an effective idea at restricting Covid, it doesnt follow if someone had proposed a rule of six 8 years ago it would have been a good idea then.
  • Options
    NigelbNigelb Posts: 62,372
    Interesting thread on coordinated Chinese anti-BBC campaign.
    https://twitter.com/JakeWallis_ASPI/status/1367343148666523649
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,924
    We all seem cheerful this morning, don't we. At least it's not raining, although can't call it a bright spring morning here.
    Looks more like November!

    More or less on topic, the CoE seems to have a magic money forest, never mind a tree. And there's at least a small sting in the tail for pensioners, with the tax thresholds unchanged.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,628

    We all seem cheerful this morning, don't we. At least it's not raining, although can't call it a bright spring morning here.
    Looks more like November!

    More or less on topic, the CoE seems to have a magic money forest, never mind a tree. And there's at least a small sting in the tail for pensioners, with the tax thresholds unchanged.

    I'm happy about it as for once the media talk of stealth taxes is apparently appropriate.

    And you try being cheerful unintentionally waking up at 4am and then deciding to follow the Cricket...
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    kle4 said:

    We all seem cheerful this morning, don't we. At least it's not raining, although can't call it a bright spring morning here.
    Looks more like November!

    More or less on topic, the CoE seems to have a magic money forest, never mind a tree. And there's at least a small sting in the tail for pensioners, with the tax thresholds unchanged.

    I'm happy about it as for once the media talk of stealth taxes is apparently appropriate.

    And you try being cheerful unintentionally waking up at 4am and then deciding to follow the Cricket...
    Well, I have to say that seems self-inflicted.

    Insomnia may be a condition, but nobody forces us to watch car crashes England batting in the subcontinent.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    We all seem cheerful this morning, don't we. At least it's not raining, although can't call it a bright spring morning here.
    Looks more like November!

    More or less on topic, the CoE seems to have a magic money forest, never mind a tree. And there's at least a small sting in the tail for pensioners, with the tax thresholds unchanged.

    I'm happy about it as for once the media talk of stealth taxes is apparently appropriate.

    And you try being cheerful unintentionally waking up at 4am and then deciding to follow the Cricket...
    Well, I have to say that seems self-inflicted.

    Insomnia may be a condition, but nobody forces us to watch car crashes England batting in the subcontinent.
    Its the hope that gets you, after the first test it seemed like we could actually play there.
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,924
    ydoethur said:

    kle4 said:

    We all seem cheerful this morning, don't we. At least it's not raining, although can't call it a bright spring morning here.
    Looks more like November!

    More or less on topic, the CoE seems to have a magic money forest, never mind a tree. And there's at least a small sting in the tail for pensioners, with the tax thresholds unchanged.

    I'm happy about it as for once the media talk of stealth taxes is apparently appropriate.

    And you try being cheerful unintentionally waking up at 4am and then deciding to follow the Cricket...
    Well, I have to say that seems self-inflicted.

    Insomnia may be a condition, but nobody forces us to watch car crashes England batting in the subcontinent.
    There seems to be a degree of masochism doesn't there? Either that or an (insane? unjustified?) hope that this time will be different. A bit like voting LD?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,903
    Nothing wrong with the pitch, just a fair contest between bat and ball tbh
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    It is obvious that Rishi Sunak will be next Prime Minister now he has followed the Corbynite agenda of moving civil servants north, furlough and the green industrial revolution, although his increasing corporation tax to 25 per cent falls short of Labour's 26!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/03/03/rishi-sunaks-budget-used-john-mcdonnells-ideas-says-jeremy-corbyn/ (£££)

    You know even thatcher talked about moving civil servants north?
  • Options
    squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 6,331
    What are the odds on all four of them gone.. Drakeford the sainted Nicola, Boris and Foster.. m
    Noone would miss them...
  • Options
    moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,244

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,397
    edited March 2021
    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Royals = big press. Even the publicly funded bits cannot help themselves.

    Honestly the whole thing is just a nonsense - clearly there have been leaks against Harry and Meghan in recent days no doubt because of their interview, but equally clearly you cant expect a great deal of sympathy when your whole deal appears to be complaining about media attention and royal status whilst making use of both of those things.

    If you are happier out of it, fine. If you have takes to tell, just do it already not this orchestrated media game of hints and clips and build up. That just makes it look like it's not important to them. And the rest of the royals can remember that playing things with a straight bat is preferable - just ignore it, as getting engaged will only rebound.
    Meghan & Harry don't count as Royals anymore. She is the new Mrs Simpson - irrelevant.

    Except that they are trying to leverage off something they have walked away from, and are not happy with the consequences of their chosen course of action.

    She is stirring the pot for her own reasons. It won't end well.
  • Options
    eekeek Posts: 24,932
    edited March 2021
    Charles said:

    It is obvious that Rishi Sunak will be next Prime Minister now he has followed the Corbynite agenda of moving civil servants north, furlough and the green industrial revolution, although his increasing corporation tax to 25 per cent falls short of Labour's 26!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/03/03/rishi-sunaks-budget-used-john-mcdonnells-ideas-says-jeremy-corbyn/ (£££)

    You know even thatcher talked about moving civil servants north?
    Yet failed to do it in any meanful way.

    I suspect the difference now is that the technology is there to do it without any real pain. Video conferencing is easy and the communication links are such that you can be in the Treasury in 3 hours (door to door)
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    edited March 2021
    eek said:

    Charles said:

    It is obvious that Rishi Sunak will be next Prime Minister now he has followed the Corbynite agenda of moving civil servants north, furlough and the green industrial revolution, although his increasing corporation tax to 25 per cent falls short of Labour's 26!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/03/03/rishi-sunaks-budget-used-john-mcdonnells-ideas-says-jeremy-corbyn/ (£££)

    You know even thatcher talked about moving civil servants north?
    Yet failed to do it in any meanful way.

    I suspect the difference now is that the technology is there to do it without any real pain. Video conferencing is easy and the communication links are such that you can be in the Treasury in 3 hours (door to door)
    It occurs to me that moving large chunks of the Treasury to Darlington makes it much less likely that they will oppose building the Leeds leg of HS2. Also, they will be far keener to roll out fibre broadband in a big way outside London.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529
    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Royals = big press. Even the publicly funded bits cannot help themselves.

    Honestly the whole thing is just a nonsense - clearly there have been leaks against Harry and Meghan in recent days no doubt because of their interview, but equally clearly you cant expect a great deal of sympathy when your whole deal appears to be complaining about media attention and royal status whilst making use of both of those things.

    If you are happier out of it, fine. If you have takes to tell, just do it already not this orchestrated media game of hints and clips and build up. That just makes it look like it's not important to them. And the rest of the royals can remember that playing things with a straight bat is preferable - just ignore it, as getting engaged will only rebound.
    Meghan & Harry don't count as Royals anymore. She is the new Mrs Simpson - irrelevant.

    Except that they are trying to leverage off something they have walked away from, and are not happy with the consequences of their chosen course of action.

    She is stirring the pot for her own reasons. It won't end well.
    And after the disgusting way they've both been treated, why shouldn't they?

    Good for them.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,077
    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Seems a bit excessive to call for Rayner’s sacking. I mean, I know she looked a fool over those AirPods, but that’s not a resigning matter really, just an embarrassment.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,222
    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    I thought the idea of the licence fee was so the BBC didn’t have to worry about chasing ratings?
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Nandy would turn the army into the Marmy. Rayner I guess would be the Apple candidate. Bring down Jackie Bailey.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Seems a bit excessive to call for Rayner’s sacking. I mean, I know she looked a fool over those AirPods, but that’s not a resigning matter really, just an embarrassment.
    Rayners Airpods or Carrie's sofa?

    It would make for an interesting contest...
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    England now into full Reluctant Turkish Conscript mode.

    And having dropped a seamer for a batsman, the wicket is seaming...
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,397
    edited March 2021

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Royals = big press. Even the publicly funded bits cannot help themselves.

    Honestly the whole thing is just a nonsense - clearly there have been leaks against Harry and Meghan in recent days no doubt because of their interview, but equally clearly you cant expect a great deal of sympathy when your whole deal appears to be complaining about media attention and royal status whilst making use of both of those things.

    If you are happier out of it, fine. If you have takes to tell, just do it already not this orchestrated media game of hints and clips and build up. That just makes it look like it's not important to them. And the rest of the royals can remember that playing things with a straight bat is preferable - just ignore it, as getting engaged will only rebound.
    Meghan & Harry don't count as Royals anymore. She is the new Mrs Simpson - irrelevant.

    Except that they are trying to leverage off something they have walked away from, and are not happy with the consequences of their chosen course of action.

    She is stirring the pot for her own reasons. It won't end well.
    And after the disgusting way they've both been treated, why shouldn't they?

    Good for them.
    Whatever. I don't buy your narrative.

    Fishing in things you say you have left is never a good idea.

    If you are leaving something behind you ... leave it behind you.
  • Options
    moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,244
    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Surely somewhere in the mix there’s someone with proper talent and charisma?
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Seems a bit excessive to call for Rayner’s sacking. I mean, I know she looked a fool over those AirPods, but that’s not a resigning matter really, just an embarrassment.
    Rayners Airpods or Carrie's sofa?

    It would make for an interesting contest...
    I don’t wish to lie about Carrie’s sofa...
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529
    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Nandy would turn the army into the Marmy. Rayner I guess would be the Apple candidate. Bring down Jackie Bailey.
    Jackie Bailey is Lib Dem isn't she?
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 31,924

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    Best of luck; remember, you only need one offer!
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,222
    edited March 2021
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    I thought the idea of the licence fee was so the BBC didn’t have to worry about chasing ratings?
    True, but the BBC gets stick for being elitist and out of touch, then gets criticised by leading with the only story anyone I met walking the dog was talking about yesterday.

    If you are looking for the bubble, look here.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,267
    5/2? Ridiculously short.

    I've laid him again substantially this morning.
  • Options
    IanB2IanB2 Posts: 47,222
    Foxy said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Nandy would turn the army into the Marmy. Rayner I guess would be the Apple candidate. Bring down Jackie Bailey.
    Jackie Bailey is Lib Dem isn't she?
    Wrong one
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Divorce lawyers are going to be busy though...
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited March 2021
    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Royals = big press. Even the publicly funded bits cannot help themselves.

    Honestly the whole thing is just a nonsense - clearly there have been leaks against Harry and Meghan in recent days no doubt because of their interview, but equally clearly you cant expect a great deal of sympathy when your whole deal appears to be complaining about media attention and royal status whilst making use of both of those things.

    If you are happier out of it, fine. If you have takes to tell, just do it already not this orchestrated media game of hints and clips and build up. That just makes it look like it's not important to them. And the rest of the royals can remember that playing things with a straight bat is preferable - just ignore it, as getting engaged will only rebound.
    Meghan & Harry don't count as Royals anymore. She is the new Mrs Simpson - irrelevant.

    Except that they are trying to leverage off something they have walked away from, and are not happy with the consequences of their chosen course of action.

    She is stirring the pot for her own reasons. It won't end well.
    And after the disgusting way they've both been treated, why shouldn't they?

    Good for them.
    Whatever. I don't buy your narrative.

    Fishing in things you say you have left is never a good idea.

    If you are leaving something behind you ... leave it behind you.
    So they can be abused, treated like shit and are just supposed to take it and not speak about their own lives?

    They're free people, free to make their own choices and do whatever they damn please. They don't owe the UK media or the monarchy anything. After the way they've been treated they absolutely can and should do whatever they want.

    Their lives, their choice.
  • Options
    MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 50,095
    Foxy said:


    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.

    Really?

    "These are not the droids you're looking for..."
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529

    5/2? Ridiculously short.

    I've laid him again substantially this morning.

    Yes, apart from anything else, no sign of Johnson leaving this side of a GE, so any chance for Sunak is at least 4 years off.

    A long time to tie up stake money, but can always trade out I suppose.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Foxy said:

    5/2? Ridiculously short.

    I've laid him again substantially this morning.

    Yes, apart from anything else, no sign of Johnson leaving this side of a GE, so any chance for Sunak is at least 4 years off.

    A long time to tie up stake money, but can always trade out I suppose.
    Indeed. Right now he looks like the natural successor when Johnson retires in 5-6 years time but a lot could happen in that time. The value from him has gone.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,754
    Sturgeon resigned yet ?
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,077

    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Divorce lawyers are going to be busy though...
    I think the problem is that people are understandably wary about investing in the training of new people in a socially distanced world.

    Doesn’t help me though of course.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    I thought the idea of the licence fee was so the BBC didn’t have to worry about chasing ratings?
    True, but the BBC gets stick for being elitist and out of touch, then gets criticised by leading with the only story anyone I met walking the dog was talking about yesterday.

    If you are looking for the bubble, look here.
    I’m just struggling to see how, when there are so many urgent matters that need covering in depth, the correct thing to do is lead with a pair of minor celebrities who don’t live in this country and spend most of their time being spiteful.

    Yes, I can see why it might make headlines in the Sun, or Mail, or Star, or Telegraph, or any of the rest of the tabloids, but public service broadcasting it ain’t.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529
    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Fox Jr seems quite busy with property, indeed had to turn away work from people wanting to complete by April. Presumably with the Stamp Duty holiday extended, they can take that up now.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    I thought the idea of the licence fee was so the BBC didn’t have to worry about chasing ratings?
    True, but the BBC gets stick for being elitist and out of touch, then gets criticised by leading with the only story anyone I met walking the dog was talking about yesterday.

    If you are looking for the bubble, look here.
    I’m just struggling to see how, when there are so many urgent matters that need covering in depth, the correct thing to do is lead with a pair of minor celebrities who don’t live in this country and spend most of their time being spiteful.

    Yes, I can see why it might make headlines in the Sun, or Mail, or Star, or Telegraph, or any of the rest of the tabloids, but public service broadcasting it ain’t.
    I 100% agree with you, except I'm curious how they're the spiteful ones, but other than that totally agreed.

    It is celebrity gossip not news.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    edited March 2021

    Sturgeon resigned yet ?

    I don’t think she will be now. Even the Scottish press have gone quiet, so the Greens and her own party rebels have no reason to bring her down.

    The only way that could change is if something else comes out during the campaign and that causes SNP voters to stay at home, leaving her well short on forming a government. But that doesn’t seem likely at the moment either.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,077
    edited March 2021
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Fox Jr seems quite busy with property, indeed had to turn away work from people wanting to complete by April. Presumably with the Stamp Duty holiday extended, they can take that up now.
    I’ve had feedback that conveyancing and property departments are so busy that they are unable to respond to internal phone calls and emails, never mind look at CVs and applications.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,321
    Interesting piece weighing up elimination vs suppression choices in Covid strategies:

    https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/03/covid-19-elimination-versus-suppression
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Fox Jr seems quite busy with property, indeed had to turn away work from people wanting to complete by April. Presumably with the Stamp Duty holiday extended, they can take that up now.
    I’ve had feedback that conveyancing and property departments are so busy that they are unable to respond to internal phone calls and emails, never mind look at CVs and applications.
    OK, that’s interesting. Pent up demand from last year?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811

    We all seem cheerful this morning, don't we. At least it's not raining, although can't call it a bright spring morning here.
    Looks more like November!

    More or less on topic, the CoE seems to have a magic money forest, never mind a tree. And there's at least a small sting in the tail for pensioners, with the tax thresholds unchanged.

    Morning OKC, very pleasant morning in Ayrshire.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    I thought the idea of the licence fee was so the BBC didn’t have to worry about chasing ratings?
    True, but the BBC gets stick for being elitist and out of touch, then gets criticised by leading with the only story anyone I met walking the dog was talking about yesterday.

    If you are looking for the bubble, look here.
    I’m just struggling to see how, when there are so many urgent matters that need covering in depth, the correct thing to do is lead with a pair of minor celebrities who don’t live in this country and spend most of their time being spiteful.

    Yes, I can see why it might make headlines in the Sun, or Mail, or Star, or Telegraph, or any of the rest of the tabloids, but public service broadcasting it ain’t.
    I 100% agree with you, except I'm curious how they're the spiteful ones, but other than that totally agreed.

    It is celebrity gossip not news.
    People want a bit of celebrity fluff to distract from all the economic and health misery, and who can blame them?

    The Royal Family are a soap opera, and entering a critical phase. Within a few years we get a new monarch.

    Most people seem to favour "nice but dim" but give me Harry and Meghan every time. At least they try to take a view on important issues.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    Considering this is a politics site I'm wondering if all the people who think that someone who leaves the monarchy should never speak to the media about the monarchy ever again apply the same philosophy to ex politicians?

    Should someone who used to be in politics like Ed Balls, Portillo, Blair or anyone else "leave it behind" the moment they leave Parliament? Never speak to the media about politics ever again? Never write a memoir? Have nothing to say ever again on politics?

    Should a Cricketer never speak about Cricket ever again once he stops batting or bowling for the last time?

    If not it seems rank hypocrisy to apply that standard to Harry and Meghan. I couldn't care less about royal gossip but they're as free to talk as any other free person is - and celebrities speaking about their own lives and things they've left behind is as old as time.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Fox Jr seems quite busy with property, indeed had to turn away work from people wanting to complete by April. Presumably with the Stamp Duty holiday extended, they can take that up now.
    I’ve had feedback that conveyancing and property departments are so busy that they are unable to respond to internal phone calls and emails, never mind look at CVs and applications.
    In part it is searches etc going slowly because of council staff working from home, but Fox Jr is as busy as ever. His is a general firm, but property is always the bread and butter. He is working as a paralegal, while applying for Training posts.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,628
    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    News is only provided to us if we are interested in it? Why are 24 hour news channels not just celebrity gossip then?

    Clearly news organisations do choose to emphasise things they think we ought to care about, not just the things we actually do care about.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,321
    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    I thought the idea of the licence fee was so the BBC didn’t have to worry about chasing ratings?
    True, but the BBC gets stick for being elitist and out of touch, then gets criticised by leading with the only story anyone I met walking the dog was talking about yesterday.

    If you are looking for the bubble, look here.
    I’m just struggling to see how, when there are so many urgent matters that need covering in depth, the correct thing to do is lead with a pair of minor celebrities who don’t live in this country and spend most of their time being spiteful.

    Yes, I can see why it might make headlines in the Sun, or Mail, or Star, or Telegraph, or any of the rest of the tabloids, but public service broadcasting it ain’t.
    The actual interview is being screened on ITV, not the BBC. I could hardly care less about the squabble (though if you pushed me I'd sympathise with Meghan and Harry), but it's a but uber-Reithian to argue that the BBC should downplay something of great public interest.

    Why it's of great public interest is curious. Perhaps it's that it's about a celebrity family that everyone is familiar with and the essence of the dispute - tradition vs disruption - is something people can get their heads round, and of course the same sort of thing is familiar from Diana, in that case with a tragic ending.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,077
    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Fox Jr seems quite busy with property, indeed had to turn away work from people wanting to complete by April. Presumably with the Stamp Duty holiday extended, they can take that up now.
    I’ve had feedback that conveyancing and property departments are so busy that they are unable to respond to internal phone calls and emails, never mind look at CVs and applications.
    In part it is searches etc going slowly because of council staff working from home, but Fox Jr is as busy as ever. His is a general firm, but property is always the bread and butter. He is working as a paralegal, while applying for Training posts.
    It sounds like Fox Jr is doing exactly what I intend to do!

    Best of luck to him.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,077
    ydoethur said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Fox Jr seems quite busy with property, indeed had to turn away work from people wanting to complete by April. Presumably with the Stamp Duty holiday extended, they can take that up now.
    I’ve had feedback that conveyancing and property departments are so busy that they are unable to respond to internal phone calls and emails, never mind look at CVs and applications.
    OK, that’s interesting. Pent up demand from last year?

    That and the prior Stamp Duty holiday deadline. That said, in my local area property seems to be continuing to come onto the market with no sign of any price drops yet...
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    kle4 said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    News is only provided to us if we are interested in it? Why are 24 hour news channels not just celebrity gossip then?

    Clearly news organisations do choose to emphasise things they think we ought to care about, not just the things we actually do care about.
    If I wanted celebrity gossip I'd watch E! not the news.

    I don't.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130

    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Divorce lawyers are going to be busy though...
    I think the problem is that people are understandably wary about investing in the training of new people in a socially distanced world.

    Doesn’t help me though of course.
    Sorry to hear you are struggling to get a start. It is a difficult time. My daughter started work last November and has yet to spend a single day in the office. In my experience most smaller firms are back in the office and have been for some time. Larger firms with more sophisticated IT systems have a lot of people working from home and probably more still on furlough. And business with people in that position is unlikely to be thinking too much about employing more people.

    In short I suspect that the smaller firms are the better bet right now.
  • Options
    moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,244
    edited March 2021

    Considering this is a politics site I'm wondering if all the people who think that someone who leaves the monarchy should never speak to the media about the monarchy ever again apply the same philosophy to ex politicians?

    Should someone who used to be in politics like Ed Balls, Portillo, Blair or anyone else "leave it behind" the moment they leave Parliament? Never speak to the media about politics ever again? Never write a memoir? Have nothing to say ever again on politics?

    Should a Cricketer never speak about Cricket ever again once he stops batting or bowling for the last time?

    If not it seems rank hypocrisy to apply that standard to Harry and Meghan. I couldn't care less about royal gossip but they're as free to talk as any other free person is - and celebrities speaking about their own lives and things they've left behind is as old as time.

    Theres not much I could think of that Megan could say that would interest me much. There’s loads interesting you could ask Harry in a “nothing off limits” interview.

    Qu 1) how’s your uncle
    Qu 2) how’s your dad. Not that one.

    Etc... let’s see if Oprah has the onions. She was pretty easy on Jacko back in the day.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811

    We all seem cheerful this morning, don't we. At least it's not raining, although can't call it a bright spring morning here.
    Looks more like November!

    More or less on topic, the CoE seems to have a magic money forest, never mind a tree. And there's at least a small sting in the tail for pensioners, with the tax thresholds unchanged.

    Morning OKC, very pleasant morning in Ayrshire.
    Foxy said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Nandy would turn the army into the Marmy. Rayner I guess would be the Apple candidate. Bring down Jackie Bailey.
    Jackie Bailey is Lib Dem isn't she?
    Labour
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    edited March 2021

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    I thought the idea of the licence fee was so the BBC didn’t have to worry about chasing ratings?
    True, but the BBC gets stick for being elitist and out of touch, then gets criticised by leading with the only story anyone I met walking the dog was talking about yesterday.

    If you are looking for the bubble, look here.
    I’m just struggling to see how, when there are so many urgent matters that need covering in depth, the correct thing to do is lead with a pair of minor celebrities who don’t live in this country and spend most of their time being spiteful.

    Yes, I can see why it might make headlines in the Sun, or Mail, or Star, or Telegraph, or any of the rest of the tabloids, but public service broadcasting it ain’t.
    The actual interview is being screened on ITV, not the BBC. I could hardly care less about the squabble (though if you pushed me I'd sympathise with Meghan and Harry), but it's a but uber-Reithian to argue that the BBC should downplay something of great public interest.

    Why it's of great public interest is curious. Perhaps it's that it's about a celebrity family that everyone is familiar with and the essence of the dispute - tradition vs disruption - is something people can get their heads round, and of course the same sort of thing is familiar from Diana, in that case with a tragic ending.
    I am not suggesting they ‘downplay’ it. I am saying it is not the most important thing in the world right now and should not be first item on their news bulletins. In other words, I am suggesting they treat it with an understanding of its relative performance.

    Do you think it should be?
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811
    Charles said:

    It is obvious that Rishi Sunak will be next Prime Minister now he has followed the Corbynite agenda of moving civil servants north, furlough and the green industrial revolution, although his increasing corporation tax to 25 per cent falls short of Labour's 26!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/03/03/rishi-sunaks-budget-used-john-mcdonnells-ideas-says-jeremy-corbyn/ (£££)

    You know even thatcher talked about moving civil servants north?
    Watford is hardly North
  • Options
    LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 15,098

    Considering this is a politics site I'm wondering if all the people who think that someone who leaves the monarchy should never speak to the media about the monarchy ever again apply the same philosophy to ex politicians?

    Should someone who used to be in politics like Ed Balls, Portillo, Blair or anyone else "leave it behind" the moment they leave Parliament? Never speak to the media about politics ever again? Never write a memoir? Have nothing to say ever again on politics?

    Should a Cricketer never speak about Cricket ever again once he stops batting or bowling for the last time?

    If not it seems rank hypocrisy to apply that standard to Harry and Meghan. I couldn't care less about royal gossip but they're as free to talk as any other free person is - and celebrities speaking about their own lives and things they've left behind is as old as time.

    Ostensibly they left the Royal setup because they didn't want the public attention and now they are purposefully setting out to gain public attention.

    I think they've been very shabbily treated by the media, but there is a suggestion of hypocrisy about their recent actions.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    malcolmg said:

    Charles said:

    It is obvious that Rishi Sunak will be next Prime Minister now he has followed the Corbynite agenda of moving civil servants north, furlough and the green industrial revolution, although his increasing corporation tax to 25 per cent falls short of Labour's 26!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/03/03/rishi-sunaks-budget-used-john-mcdonnells-ideas-says-jeremy-corbyn/ (£££)

    You know even thatcher talked about moving civil servants north?
    Watford is hardly North
    And she didn’t Grantham sufficient powers either.
  • Options
    ydoethurydoethur Posts: 67,109
    There is a certain irony that having criticised the BBC for leading with a minor news story, I seem to have made it the main subject of discussion on here.

    I shall go and do some marking. See you later.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    I thought the idea of the licence fee was so the BBC didn’t have to worry about chasing ratings?
    True, but the BBC gets stick for being elitist and out of touch, then gets criticised by leading with the only story anyone I met walking the dog was talking about yesterday.

    If you are looking for the bubble, look here.
    I’m just struggling to see how, when there are so many urgent matters that need covering in depth, the correct thing to do is lead with a pair of minor celebrities who don’t live in this country and spend most of their time being spiteful.

    Yes, I can see why it might make headlines in the Sun, or Mail, or Star, or Telegraph, or any of the rest of the tabloids, but public service broadcasting it ain’t.
    I 100% agree with you, except I'm curious how they're the spiteful ones, but other than that totally agreed.

    It is celebrity gossip not news.
    People want a bit of celebrity fluff to distract from all the economic and health misery, and who can blame them?

    The Royal Family are a soap opera, and entering a critical phase. Within a few years we get a new monarch.

    Most people seem to favour "nice but dim" but give me Harry and Meghan every time. At least they try to take a view on important issues.
    Pity they did not have the brain cells to articulate it. A deluded divvy and a grasping American wannabe, the perfect couple. Why don't they just stick to airhead rubbish and spend their millions rather than trying to pretend they have any clue about real life. Just another set of royal parasites.
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,628

    Considering this is a politics site I'm wondering if all the people who think that someone who leaves the monarchy should never speak to the media about the monarchy ever again apply the same philosophy to ex politicians?

    Should someone who used to be in politics like Ed Balls, Portillo, Blair or anyone else "leave it behind" the moment they leave Parliament? Never speak to the media about politics ever again? Never write a memoir? Have nothing to say ever again on politics?

    Should a Cricketer never speak about Cricket ever again once he stops batting or bowling for the last time?

    If not it seems rank hypocrisy to apply that standard to Harry and Meghan. I couldn't care less about royal gossip but they're as free to talk as any other free person is - and celebrities speaking about their own lives and things they've left behind is as old as time.

    I think you are deliberately missing and misrepresenting the core objection, in that it's how they speak that is the issue. They are playing a media game whilst constantly moaning about media games.

    As I said, if they have tales to tell, do it. Trailing for weeks in advance, leaking titbits and so on, that's what you do if you are hawking a product.

    What it tells me is they dont care all that much about what they are saying as they are doing it in a way to manage a brand they can sell, rather than just say straight up what they mean if it is important. It would be huge news regardless

    And yes the main royals do that. But they aren't pretending not to want to play the royal and media game.

    I'd like to see Meghan go back to acting and Harry could do any number of things now, they seem happier together than he was previously so great for them. But the careful orchestration of royal esque media management makes their disdain for such things look hypocritical.

    Either you play the game or you dont. They are, whilst pretending they aren't.
  • Options
    GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,077
    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Divorce lawyers are going to be busy though...
    I think the problem is that people are understandably wary about investing in the training of new people in a socially distanced world.

    Doesn’t help me though of course.
    Sorry to hear you are struggling to get a start. It is a difficult time. My daughter started work last November and has yet to spend a single day in the office. In my experience most smaller firms are back in the office and have been for some time. Larger firms with more sophisticated IT systems have a lot of people working from home and probably more still on furlough. And business with people in that position is unlikely to be thinking too much about employing more people.

    In short I suspect that the smaller firms are the better bet right now.
    Thank you for your thoughts.

    It’s my experience too that smaller firms are mostly back in their offices while the bigger firms are not. However of course smaller firms are more wary and risk-adverse with their recruitment. I’ve been targeting both smaller firms and larger firms but as @AlastairMeeks has previously advised, and I agree with him, larger firms seem to value my previous engineering career work experience and “non-traditional” background more. Despite this I’d probably prefer to work for a small to medium sized firm.

    We ride on!
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529
    edited March 2021

    Foxy said:

    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Fox Jr seems quite busy with property, indeed had to turn away work from people wanting to complete by April. Presumably with the Stamp Duty holiday extended, they can take that up now.
    I’ve had feedback that conveyancing and property departments are so busy that they are unable to respond to internal phone calls and emails, never mind look at CVs and applications.
    In part it is searches etc going slowly because of council staff working from home, but Fox Jr is as busy as ever. His is a general firm, but property is always the bread and butter. He is working as a paralegal, while applying for Training posts.
    It sounds like Fox Jr is doing exactly what I intend to do!

    Best of luck to him.
    His firm does sound a bit of a sweatshop, but he seems happy enough and gaining useful experience. Nice to have him earning.

    Fox Jr 2 is the budding actor. I expect him to be on the payroll for longer!
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,903

    DavidL said:

    ydoethur said:

    Another day; more job rejections, probably.

    Job hunting is soul destroying.

    I feel your pain. I have unfond memories of 2008.

    Hunting in a slump is never fun, particularly since I imagine work in solicitors’ offices has declined with fewer property transactions and the courts all shut.
    Divorce lawyers are going to be busy though...
    I think the problem is that people are understandably wary about investing in the training of new people in a socially distanced world.

    Doesn’t help me though of course.
    Sorry to hear you are struggling to get a start. It is a difficult time. My daughter started work last November and has yet to spend a single day in the office. In my experience most smaller firms are back in the office and have been for some time. Larger firms with more sophisticated IT systems have a lot of people working from home and probably more still on furlough. And business with people in that position is unlikely to be thinking too much about employing more people.

    In short I suspect that the smaller firms are the better bet right now.
    Thank you for your thoughts.

    It’s my experience too that smaller firms are mostly back in their offices while the bigger firms are not. However of course smaller firms are more wary and risk-adverse with their recruitment. I’ve been targeting both smaller firms and larger firms but as @AlastairMeeks has previously advised, and I agree with him, larger firms seem to value my previous engineering career work experience and “non-traditional” background more. Despite this I’d probably prefer to work for a small to medium sized firm.

    We ride on!
    I work for an SME, we're not all back but there are a certain number of people in our offices from day to day as certain tasks can't be completed from home. I think you might have more luck once the official advice is changed to employer's disgression as more SMEs will be fully back with that.
  • Options
    Foxy said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Nandy would turn the army into the Marmy. Rayner I guess would be the Apple candidate. Bring down Jackie Bailey.
    Jackie Bailey is Lib Dem isn't she?
    Jackie Baillie isn't and she was the star performer in the Sturgeon appearance yesterday

    A talent that Westminster Labour are sadly missing
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Foxy said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Nandy would turn the army into the Marmy. Rayner I guess would be the Apple candidate. Bring down Jackie Bailey.
    Jackie Bailey is Lib Dem isn't she?
    Oops - Baillie! SLAB deputy leader.
  • Options
    FoxyFoxy Posts: 44,529
    malcolmg said:

    We all seem cheerful this morning, don't we. At least it's not raining, although can't call it a bright spring morning here.
    Looks more like November!

    More or less on topic, the CoE seems to have a magic money forest, never mind a tree. And there's at least a small sting in the tail for pensioners, with the tax thresholds unchanged.

    Morning OKC, very pleasant morning in Ayrshire.
    Foxy said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Nandy would turn the army into the Marmy. Rayner I guess would be the Apple candidate. Bring down Jackie Bailey.
    Jackie Bailey is Lib Dem isn't she?
    Labour
    I was thinking of the notorious council meeting. A different Jackie?
  • Options
    MattWMattW Posts: 18,397

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Royals = big press. Even the publicly funded bits cannot help themselves.

    Honestly the whole thing is just a nonsense - clearly there have been leaks against Harry and Meghan in recent days no doubt because of their interview, but equally clearly you cant expect a great deal of sympathy when your whole deal appears to be complaining about media attention and royal status whilst making use of both of those things.

    If you are happier out of it, fine. If you have takes to tell, just do it already not this orchestrated media game of hints and clips and build up. That just makes it look like it's not important to them. And the rest of the royals can remember that playing things with a straight bat is preferable - just ignore it, as getting engaged will only rebound.
    Meghan & Harry don't count as Royals anymore. She is the new Mrs Simpson - irrelevant.

    Except that they are trying to leverage off something they have walked away from, and are not happy with the consequences of their chosen course of action.

    She is stirring the pot for her own reasons. It won't end well.
    And after the disgusting way they've both been treated, why shouldn't they?

    Good for them.
    Whatever. I don't buy your narrative.

    Fishing in things you say you have left is never a good idea.

    If you are leaving something behind you ... leave it behind you.
    So they can be abused, treated like shit and are just supposed to take it and not speak about their own lives?

    They're free people, free to make their own choices and do whatever they damn please. They don't owe the UK media or the monarchy anything. After the way they've been treated they absolutely can and should do whatever they want.

    Their lives, their choice.
    Allegedly abused. Allegedly treated like shit etc.

    Of course they are free to do whatever they want, however starting a so-called "new chapter" (BBC headline) by giving high profile interviews 15 months after "moving on" does not seem wise.

    I've made 2 points:

    1 - This couple are minor celebs and I don't think relevant.
    2 - Not moving on does not seem very wise.

    If you have issues with your family, playing out the drama in the press is questionable.
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    eek said:

    Charles said:

    It is obvious that Rishi Sunak will be next Prime Minister now he has followed the Corbynite agenda of moving civil servants north, furlough and the green industrial revolution, although his increasing corporation tax to 25 per cent falls short of Labour's 26!
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/03/03/rishi-sunaks-budget-used-john-mcdonnells-ideas-says-jeremy-corbyn/ (£££)

    You know even thatcher talked about moving civil servants north?
    Yet failed to do it in any meanful way.

    I suspect the difference now is that the technology is there to do it without any real pain. Video conferencing is easy and the communication links are such that you can be in the Treasury in 3 hours (door to door)
    Both fair points.

    I was just observing that @DecrepitJohnL was being ridiculous claiming it - and everything else - as part of a Corbynite agenda

    It’s like claiming only Democrats like motherhood and apple pie
  • Options

    MattW said:

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Royals = big press. Even the publicly funded bits cannot help themselves.

    Honestly the whole thing is just a nonsense - clearly there have been leaks against Harry and Meghan in recent days no doubt because of their interview, but equally clearly you cant expect a great deal of sympathy when your whole deal appears to be complaining about media attention and royal status whilst making use of both of those things.

    If you are happier out of it, fine. If you have takes to tell, just do it already not this orchestrated media game of hints and clips and build up. That just makes it look like it's not important to them. And the rest of the royals can remember that playing things with a straight bat is preferable - just ignore it, as getting engaged will only rebound.
    Meghan & Harry don't count as Royals anymore. She is the new Mrs Simpson - irrelevant.

    Except that they are trying to leverage off something they have walked away from, and are not happy with the consequences of their chosen course of action.

    She is stirring the pot for her own reasons. It won't end well.
    And after the disgusting way they've both been treated, why shouldn't they?

    Good for them.
    Whatever. I don't buy your narrative.

    Fishing in things you say you have left is never a good idea.

    If you are leaving something behind you ... leave it behind you.
    So they can be abused, treated like shit and are just supposed to take it and not speak about their own lives?

    They're free people, free to make their own choices and do whatever they damn please. They don't owe the UK media or the monarchy anything. After the way they've been treated they absolutely can and should do whatever they want.

    Their lives, their choice.
    And as they are press averse stop doing the opposite

    Retire from public life and do their own thing
  • Options
    CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    MattW said:

    kle4 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Royals = big press. Even the publicly funded bits cannot help themselves.

    Honestly the whole thing is just a nonsense - clearly there have been leaks against Harry and Meghan in recent days no doubt because of their interview, but equally clearly you cant expect a great deal of sympathy when your whole deal appears to be complaining about media attention and royal status whilst making use of both of those things.

    If you are happier out of it, fine. If you have takes to tell, just do it already not this orchestrated media game of hints and clips and build up. That just makes it look like it's not important to them. And the rest of the royals can remember that playing things with a straight bat is preferable - just ignore it, as getting engaged will only rebound.
    Meghan & Harry don't count as Royals anymore. She is the new Mrs Simpson - irrelevant.

    Except that they are trying to leverage off something they have walked away from, and are not happy with the consequences of their chosen course of action.

    She is stirring the pot for her own reasons. It won't end well.
    And after the disgusting way they've both been treated, why shouldn't they?

    Good for them.
    If only you knew
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811
    Sturgeon is far from out of the woods just yet.

    Press Statement by Alex Salmond

    1. Mr Salmond has lodged a formal complaint with the Permanent Secretary to the Scottish Government under the civil service code, on the conduct of the official who is alleged to have breached civil service rules, by disclosing the name of a complainant in the Scottish Government process.
    2. A letter has been sent to the Parliamentary Committee Convener supplying further requested evidence but also noting that we could complete our evidence if the Parliament would serve a Section 23 Order on Levy & McRae as suggested last Friday.
    3. Mr Salmond will be interviewed by Mr James Hamilton, Independent Investigator on the Ministerial Code, this week.
    4. The requested information that was supplied today is a) the minutes of the Commission and Diligence of late December 2018, b) the minute of proceedings of the Court decision of 8th January 2019 at which the Government decisions were found to be “unlawful”, “procedurally unfair” and “tainted by apparent bias” and c) a specific witness statement requested by the Committee.
    5. That witness statement provides further corroboration for Mr Salmond’s evidence before the Committee. On all key points with varying accounts Mr Salmond was asked by the Committee to provide corroboration and has now done so with multiple independent witnesses. The First Minister has not provided the Committee with any such corroboration.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Foxy said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    IanB2 said:

    ydoethur said:

    The BBC are not covering themselves in glory today.

    On a day when they could have led with the budget, the first minister of Scotland being accused of perjury, a global pandemic, schools being sent back with impossible safety measures, an academy chain going bust and all hell breaking loose in and over Northern Ireland...

    ...they led with the Duchess of Sussex giving an interview.

    I sometimes wonder if they want to keep the licence fee.

    Try talking to people in the street, to see which of the three breaking stories more people are following?
    I thought the idea of the licence fee was so the BBC didn’t have to worry about chasing ratings?
    True, but the BBC gets stick for being elitist and out of touch, then gets criticised by leading with the only story anyone I met walking the dog was talking about yesterday.

    If you are looking for the bubble, look here.
    I’m just struggling to see how, when there are so many urgent matters that need covering in depth, the correct thing to do is lead with a pair of minor celebrities who don’t live in this country and spend most of their time being spiteful.

    Yes, I can see why it might make headlines in the Sun, or Mail, or Star, or Telegraph, or any of the rest of the tabloids, but public service broadcasting it ain’t.
    I 100% agree with you, except I'm curious how they're the spiteful ones, but other than that totally agreed.

    It is celebrity gossip not news.
    People want a bit of celebrity fluff to distract from all the economic and health misery, and who can blame them?

    The Royal Family are a soap opera, and entering a critical phase. Within a few years we get a new monarch.

    Most people seem to favour "nice but dim" but give me Harry and Meghan every time. At least they try to take a view on important issues.
    They have lost of views and all at a hefty price.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826

    Considering this is a politics site I'm wondering if all the people who think that someone who leaves the monarchy should never speak to the media about the monarchy ever again apply the same philosophy to ex politicians?

    Should someone who used to be in politics like Ed Balls, Portillo, Blair or anyone else "leave it behind" the moment they leave Parliament? Never speak to the media about politics ever again? Never write a memoir? Have nothing to say ever again on politics?

    Should a Cricketer never speak about Cricket ever again once he stops batting or bowling for the last time?

    If not it seems rank hypocrisy to apply that standard to Harry and Meghan. I couldn't care less about royal gossip but they're as free to talk as any other free person is - and celebrities speaking about their own lives and things they've left behind is as old as time.

    Ostensibly they left the Royal setup because they didn't want the public attention and now they are purposefully setting out to gain public attention.

    I think they've been very shabbily treated by the media, but there is a suggestion of hypocrisy about their recent actions.
    After they criticised the Daily Mail for treating them atrociously - and as the recent court case showed the Mail acted illegally too - and they were giving interviews to the Mail then I would agree its hypocritical.

    As far as I know they've never complained about the way Oprah has treated them so why shouldn't they talk to Oprah?

    Mail on the naughty list, Oprah on the nice list as far as they're concerned. I don't see how that's weird.
  • Options
    ydoethur said:

    Sturgeon resigned yet ?

    I don’t think she will be now. Even the Scottish press have gone quiet, so the Greens and her own party rebels have no reason to bring her down.

    The only way that could change is if something else comes out during the campaign and that causes SNP voters to stay at home, leaving her well short on forming a government. But that doesn’t seem likely at the moment either.
    The two reports due to be concluded will be the moment for Sturgeon to survive or go
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,130
    As I have already lamented work got in the way of what was a very interesting news day yesterday but from going through comments on here and in the media it appears that SKS really did not come up to the mark. His frankly bizarre focus at PMQs was reminiscent of the worst days of Corbyn and his budget response seems to have caused barely a ripple.

    Of course it is hard for Labour to effectively oppose a budget that was far more Labour than Tory in outlook with large deficits, large tax increases, large amounts of public spending and a bit of shuffling of civil servants chucked in. Its a problem Labour have to handle though. The Tories had the same problem at a fundamental level under Blair despite Brown's bombastic announcements of tuppance ha'pny on this and that and fiendishly complex schemes on the other. Labour are facing a Labour government in everything but name and they need to think hard about this.
  • Options
    malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 41,811
    Foxy said:

    malcolmg said:

    We all seem cheerful this morning, don't we. At least it's not raining, although can't call it a bright spring morning here.
    Looks more like November!

    More or less on topic, the CoE seems to have a magic money forest, never mind a tree. And there's at least a small sting in the tail for pensioners, with the tax thresholds unchanged.

    Morning OKC, very pleasant morning in Ayrshire.
    Foxy said:

    felix said:

    Foxy said:

    moonshine said:

    Sunak's rise is based on a realisation that the next PM is not going to be Starmer. That Rishi spike aligns with the Leader of the Opposition giving a woeful Budget response.

    On reflection my favourite bit yesterday was all the earnest defending of Steir’s woeful performance at PMQs. “He’s being deliberately shit as a hustle for the main event of the budget. Sucker punch.”

    Time he’s moved on. I want my government to be properly held account please.
    Starmers dullness extends to his poor front bench.

    It is difficult to showcase talent at the moment but while some of Starmers internal party work in purging the Trots is laudable, there is more than that to do.

    Rayner or Nandy please, preferably Rayner.
    Nandy would turn the army into the Marmy. Rayner I guess would be the Apple candidate. Bring down Jackie Bailey.
    Jackie Bailey is Lib Dem isn't she?
    Labour
    I was thinking of the notorious council meeting. A different Jackie?
    Now that was an interesting meeting
This discussion has been closed.