Worth noting that when the 2017 local election seats were fought, the Tories also had an 11% lead over Labour on the actual result - albeit on 38%-27%. If Labour are to make any gains, they look to be from LibDems (7% now versus 18% actual in 2017). Labour will stand still as against the Tories at best (note YouGov has 3% for Refuk, but as most seats won't have a candidate that could add a point or two to the Tory lead).
Those seats last fought in 2016 could prove to be horrible for Labour, where they actually finished one point ahead of the Tories on 31%, Tories on 30%, LibDems 15%, UKIP 12%. Looking at projections for these seats - where they won 1326 Councillors to the Tories 842 - may be where the gloom in Labour's internal machine is coming from.
Starmer could be down 200-250 councillors after next Thursday.
I've almost always voted Tory. I would still do so in a general election. However I'm pretty fed up with local Tory planning decisions and am flirting with voting Green for some candidates. If I'm representative then these local elections do not represent overall opinion.
I think that has been true of local elections through the decades
We had a very good lib dem personal friend who we always voted for at locals
However, for me next thursday's results from Scotland, Wales and Hartlepool are the main ones of interest and the headline makers
There is a distinction between doing the right thing and being popular Philip. I should know I support the LDs.
I would be happy to give Boris the benefit of the doubt. If you remember I supported him here recently on another issue. But why the hell is he unwilling to answer a very easy question?
He's answered the question as far as I'm concerned: the question originally was who is paying for it and the answer is he paid for it. 🤷♂️
Now people have moved on to other questions as they tend to do. It becomes one of those process stories that you answer one question and then people drag it out and out and out. He's paid for it, there's a report ongoing and if any further declarations are needed then they'll be made. Big freaking deal. Millions of people are worried about their jobs, around the world there's thousands of people a day dying from the virus and this is what the media want to talk about? Its narcissistic puerile nonsense.
Well I agree with what you have said so why doesn't he just answer the question then. You might be happy but others aren't and it isn't a difficult question to answer so answer it. The refusal to answer just makes people believe there is an issue.
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
Can the rest of us veto the publication of an official inquiry into ourselves? Or decide the terms of reference into such an inquiry?
It depends.
If the inquiry is by the Police and the CPS then the PM can't veto it, can he? If you're eg Director of a company and you hire someone to create a report for you and to report to you, then I don't see why you couldn't.
There are laws on directors and conflicts of interests, including indirect and potential conflicts.
Indeed and if laws are broken then the Police and CPS can get involved. Like they could if the PM has committed a crime and he can't (to my knowledge) stop that.
UK Tories aim to chip away at ‘red wall’ in key electoral test for Boris Johnson A Tory win in the Hartlepool by-election would be a disaster for Labour, which has held the seat since 1974.
There is a distinction between doing the right thing and being popular Philip. I should know I support the LDs.
I would be happy to give Boris the benefit of the doubt. If you remember I supported him here recently on another issue. But why the hell is he unwilling to answer a very easy question?
How does being wrong and unpopular help you make that distinction 🤷♂️
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
Can the rest of us veto the publication of an official inquiry into ourselves? Or decide the terms of reference into such an inquiry?
It depends.
If the inquiry is by the Police and the CPS then the PM can't veto it, can he? If you're eg Director of a company and you hire someone to create a report for you and to report to you, then I don't see why you couldn't.
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
Can the rest of us veto the publication of an official inquiry into ourselves? Or decide the terms of reference into such an inquiry?
It depends.
If the inquiry is by the Police and the CPS then the PM can't veto it, can he? If you're eg Director of a company and you hire someone to create a report for you and to report to you, then I don't see why you couldn't.
There are laws on directors and conflicts of interests, including indirect and potential conflicts.
Indeed and if laws are broken then the Police and CPS can get involved. Like they could if the PM has committed a crime and he can't (to my knowledge) stop that.
I would imagine the police would only get involved in the most egregious breaches, if at all. The vast majority of businesses will manage this on an honour system, where people recognise they obviously cant be involved where there is a conflict of interest. Where breached and important it would probably be resolved through civil courts.
The problem is the PM has no honour, not that the CPS need to get involved.
Worth noting that when the 2017 local election seats were fought, the Tories also had an 11% lead over Labour on the actual result - albeit on 38%-27%. If Labour are to make any gains, they look to be from LibDems (7% now versus 18% actual in 2017). Labour will stand still as against the Tories at best (note YouGov has 3% for Refuk, but as most seats won't have a candidate that could add a point or two to the Tory lead).
Those seats last fought in 2016 could prove to be horrible for Labour, where they actually finished one point ahead of the Tories on 31%, Tories on 30%, LibDems 15%, UKIP 12%. Looking at projections for these seats - where they won 1326 Councillors to the Tories 842 - may be where the gloom in Labour's internal machine is coming from.
Starmer could be down 200-250 councillors after next Thursday.
I would love to know what idiot came up with a party name that shortens to ‘Refuck.’
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
Well a bit of honesty from the PM could soon clear it up if that was the case.
But honesty, from Johnson? I wouldn't hold your breath.
I’m sure it will be disclosed when the updated register ispublished
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
Well a bit of honesty from the PM could soon clear it up if that was the case.
But honesty, from Johnson? I wouldn't hold your breath.
I’m sure it will be disclosed when the updated register ispublished
Why not just answer now if there is a simple explanation?
There is a distinction between doing the right thing and being popular Philip. I should know I support the LDs.
I would be happy to give Boris the benefit of the doubt. If you remember I supported him here recently on another issue. But why the hell is he unwilling to answer a very easy question?
How does being wrong and unpopular help you make that distinction 🤷♂️
It’s curious that the Tories are happy to write off London, despite winning there not long ago. Not something they want to talk about.
It's curious because London's economy has generally been the strongest in the country, and so the story Tories tell about themselves would have London voting Tory as a result.
In electoral terms, however, it looks like a huge bit of self-gerrymandering by Labour.
It’s curious that the Tories are happy to write off London, despite winning there not long ago. Not something they want to talk about.
I don't think it's all London - Johnson after all represents a London constituency - but definitely Zones 1 and 2. Also, the Tories probably see opportunities in constituencies that have a large Indian population in the West / NW of London.
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
Well a bit of honesty from the PM could soon clear it up if that was the case.
But honesty, from Johnson? I wouldn't hold your breath.
I’m sure it will be disclosed when the updated register ispublished
Why not just answer now if there is a simple explanation?
Because he’s decided that this is the better route politically
It’s curious that the Tories are happy to write off London, despite winning there not long ago. Not something they want to talk about.
I expect that there will be something for everyone in the elections next week, there usually is. I would count the revival of Labour in Scotland as more significant than London though. If the SCONs are pushed into 3rd place, that is quite a key revival.
Virtually nothing visible in my bit of Leics though.
There is a distinction between doing the right thing and being popular Philip. I should know I support the LDs.
I would be happy to give Boris the benefit of the doubt. If you remember I supported him here recently on another issue. But why the hell is he unwilling to answer a very easy question?
How does being wrong and unpopular help you make that distinction 🤷♂️
UK Tories aim to chip away at ‘red wall’ in key electoral test for Boris Johnson A Tory win in the Hartlepool by-election would be a disaster for Labour, which has held the seat since 1974.
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
Well a bit of honesty from the PM could soon clear it up if that was the case.
But honesty, from Johnson? I wouldn't hold your breath.
I’m sure it will be disclosed when the updated register ispublished
Why not just answer now if there is a simple explanation?
Because he’s decided that this is the better route politically
Yes, I can see that not telling the truth is better politically.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
What these charts fairly consistently show is that the UK not only started vaccinating much earlier but continues to vaccinate quicker than the EU as a whole. We are roughly 13% of EU +UK and in this table we have 20% of new vaccines. The result is that our lead over the EU increases as we head to full vaccination and we will be there 2 -2.5 months ahead of the EU.
Which will be worth a few thousand lives in each of the major countries but in the overall scheme of things for the pandemic is not likely to be that material. Italy and Belgium are already well ahead of us in deaths per million and will move more so but it is unlikely that France and Germany will catch up.
Economically, our faster vaccination means that our recovery should be rough a quarter ahead of the EU but we were hit harder than most with more severe lockdowns so a faster recovery was pretty likely anyway.
What this might mean for the government is that the considerable credit that it is getting for fast and effective roll out is likely to fade fairly quickly and may well be gone by the end of this year when the focus will be on the overall performance where the UK is mid table at best, not even that on some measures. It seems probable to me that Tory leads will wane considerably at that point.
It's especially ironic as England, unlike Scotland or Wales, doesn't have a major nationalist party.
It does now.
You and I possibly have different definitions of the word nationalist.
Which major English 🏴 party is pledging English 🏴 independence? In the same way that the SNP are pledging Scottish 🏴 independence?
Boris is promising English supremacy by saying he will block and Independence Referendum regardless of the result in a week.
That’s because the law says it’s up to the Westminster parliament. You may not like it, but that’s the law. If you disagree either go to court (some people argue there is doubt) or change the law.
Mr. Ace, does any major UK party advocate England leaving the UK?
No, but one major party is pursuing agendas that push away the other countries, or treat them as occupied zones.
You mean implementing legislation that a majority in parliament votes for?
I can see why you might not like that
Yes, the tyranny of an English majority in Westminster is behind the disquiet in the other countries. The shafting of the DUP being a pertinent one this week.
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
Well a bit of honesty from the PM could soon clear it up if that was the case.
But honesty, from Johnson? I wouldn't hold your breath.
I’m sure it will be disclosed when the updated register ispublished
Why not just answer now if there is a simple explanation?
Because he’s decided that this is the better route politically
Yes, I can see that not telling the truth is better politically.
Perhaps the strategists think angry Boris brings out the vote and this gives him something to pretend to be angry about.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Mr. Ace, does any major UK party advocate England leaving the UK?
No, but one major party is pursuing agendas that push away the other countries, or treat them as occupied zones.
You mean implementing legislation that a majority in parliament votes for?
I can see why you might not like that
Yes, the tyranny of an English majority in Westminster is behind the disquiet in the other countries. The shafting of the DUP being a pertinent one this week.
Wales also voted Leave.
If Scotland and Northern Ireland were really going to be shafted by Boris then he would have gone to No Deal Brexit and imposed a hard border in Ireland
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
Well a bit of honesty from the PM could soon clear it up if that was the case.
But honesty, from Johnson? I wouldn't hold your breath.
I’m sure it will be disclosed when the updated register ispublished
Why not just answer now if there is a simple explanation?
Because he’s decided that this is the better route politically
Yes, I can see that not telling the truth is better politically.
He doesn’t have to answer every question. That’s not the same as “not telling the truth”
The media is interested in bullshit. We’ve seen that time and again in COVID. If the government was addressing every topic you’d accuse them of dancing to the Mail’s tune or something
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer does no stunts - You cant be PM with less personality than your opponent! Starmer does stunts - You cant be PM doing stunts like that!
Have Starmer critics thought maybe they just dont like him because he is a lefty, not because of his personality?
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
The problem was the look of disdain on his face as he looked at the John Lewis product
It’s curious that the Tories are happy to write off London, despite winning there not long ago. Not something they want to talk about.
Even Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown and Corbyn in 2019 won London.
The Tories only won London under Boris before Brexit and then they had zero chance of winning Red Wall seats like Hartlepool.
They have simply swapped wealthy London Remain seats like Enfield Southgate and Richmond Park they won in 2010 and 2015 for working class redwall Leave seats like West Bromwich and Burnley they won in 2019
Mr. Ace, does any major UK party advocate England leaving the UK?
No, but one major party is pursuing agendas that push away the other countries, or treat them as occupied zones.
You mean implementing legislation that a majority in parliament votes for?
I can see why you might not like that
Yes, the tyranny of an English majority in Westminster is behind the disquiet in the other countries. The shafting of the DUP being a pertinent one this week.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
The problem was the look of disdain on his face as he looked at the John Lewis product
That's just his normal facial expression when looking at anything or anyone though. John Lewis should not be offended.
Has there been any public questioning in some of the Sputnik driven rollouts in central and Eastern European countries about the (on the face of it) mixed effectiveness of the vaccine in driving down cases. Or is the consensus that the vaccines are fine, it's just they haven't had the lockdowns that have been a major factor in places like the UK?
I haven't seen anywhere else publish such detailed information as our ONS/PHE has done on age stratification of which Malmesbury's charts on here showed a clear vaccine effect. Unless you have that information, combined with a strict stratified rollout it's not really possible to judge a vaccine effect till you have a large section of the population covered.
It's especially ironic as England, unlike Scotland or Wales, doesn't have a major nationalist party.
It does now.
You and I possibly have different definitions of the word nationalist.
Which major English 🏴 party is pledging English 🏴 independence? In the same way that the SNP are pledging Scottish 🏴 independence?
Boris is promising English supremacy by saying he will block and Independence Referendum regardless of the result in a week.
No, HYUFD is saying that.
Boris is saying people should vote Scottish Conservatives and there should not be a second referendum. He's not actually prejudged the election results.
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
Well a bit of honesty from the PM could soon clear it up if that was the case.
But honesty, from Johnson? I wouldn't hold your breath.
I’m sure it will be disclosed when the updated register ispublished
Why not just answer now if there is a simple explanation?
Because he’s decided that this is the better route politically
Yes, I can see that not telling the truth is better politically.
He doesn’t have to answer every question. That’s not the same as “not telling the truth”
The media is interested in bullshit. We’ve seen that time and again in COVID. If the government was addressing every topic you’d accuse them of dancing to the Mail’s tune or something
Isn't the point of #PMQs that MPs question the PM, and he answers them?
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
The problem was the look of disdain on his face as he looked at the John Lewis product
That's just his normal facial expression when looking at anything or anyone though. John Lewis should not be offended.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Of course they can. Starmer's shtick was meant to be that he is better than that. Why is this hard to understand?
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
Well a bit of honesty from the PM could soon clear it up if that was the case.
But honesty, from Johnson? I wouldn't hold your breath.
I’m sure it will be disclosed when the updated register ispublished
Why not just answer now if there is a simple explanation?
Because he’s decided that this is the better route politically
Yes, I can see that not telling the truth is better politically.
He doesn’t have to answer every question. That’s not the same as “not telling the truth”
The media is interested in bullshit. We’ve seen that time and again in COVID. If the government was addressing every topic you’d accuse them of dancing to the Mail’s tune or something
Isn't the point of #PMQs that MPs question the PM, and he answers them?
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
Well a bit of honesty from the PM could soon clear it up if that was the case.
But honesty, from Johnson? I wouldn't hold your breath.
I’m sure it will be disclosed when the updated register ispublished
Why not just answer now if there is a simple explanation?
Because he’s decided that this is the better route politically
Yes, I can see that not telling the truth is better politically.
He doesn’t have to answer every question. That’s not the same as “not telling the truth”
The media is interested in bullshit. We’ve seen that time and again in COVID. If the government was addressing every topic you’d accuse them of dancing to the Mail’s tune or something
Isn't the point of #PMQs that MPs question the PM, and he answers them?
It’s curious that the Tories are happy to write off London, despite winning there not long ago. Not something they want to talk about.
I expect that there will be something for everyone in the elections next week, there usually is. I would count the revival of Labour in Scotland as more significant than London though. If the SCONs are pushed into 3rd place, that is quite a key revival.
Virtually nothing visible in my bit of Leics though.
Some recent polls have Labour losing seats, but coming second only because the Tories lose more seats.
Is that a revival? Perhaps from the nadir Leonard had lead them to, but it would be quite the revival of Labour's media operation to successfully portray that as an electoral revival.
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
Well a bit of honesty from the PM could soon clear it up if that was the case.
But honesty, from Johnson? I wouldn't hold your breath.
I’m sure it will be disclosed when the updated register ispublished
Why not just answer now if there is a simple explanation?
Because he’s decided that this is the better route politically
Yes, I can see that not telling the truth is better politically.
He doesn’t have to answer every question. That’s not the same as “not telling the truth”
The media is interested in bullshit. We’ve seen that time and again in COVID. If the government was addressing every topic you’d accuse them of dancing to the Mail’s tune or something
Isn't the point of #PMQs that MPs question the PM, and he answers them?
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer does no stunts - You cant be PM with less personality than your opponent! Starmer does stunts - You cant be PM doing stunts like that!
Have Starmer critics thought maybe they just dont like him because he is a lefty, not because of his personality?
No, he's just not very good and it's disappointing because we need a strong opposition to the government more than ever given how our liberties are being curtailed. A good opposition leader would be planning with Tory rebels right now to defeat the government on their likely renewal of the virus measures in September. Instead he'll bitch for about two seconds and then quietly vote in favour leaving 60-80 Tory rebels wondering what they need to do to get the opposition to actually bloody oppose.
Worth noting that when the 2017 local election seats were fought, the Tories also had an 11% lead over Labour on the actual result - albeit on 38%-27%. If Labour are to make any gains, they look to be from LibDems (7% now versus 18% actual in 2017). Labour will stand still as against the Tories at best (note YouGov has 3% for Refuk, but as most seats won't have a candidate that could add a point or two to the Tory lead).
Those seats last fought in 2016 could prove to be horrible for Labour, where they actually finished one point ahead of the Tories on 31%, Tories on 30%, LibDems 15%, UKIP 12%. Looking at projections for these seats - where they won 1326 Councillors to the Tories 842 - may be where the gloom in Labour's internal machine is coming from.
Starmer could be down 200-250 councillors after next Thursday.
I've almost always voted Tory. I would still do so in a general election. However I'm pretty fed up with local Tory planning decisions and am flirting with voting Green for some candidates. If I'm representative then these local elections do not represent overall opinion.
Indeed, locally here in Epping Forest canvassing we still have a fair number of voters who voted Conservative at the general election but will vote LD or Green or Residents Association locally at council level because they do not want any new housing, especially not in green belt and green field areas.
That was a pattern shown across the Home Counties in 2019 when the Tories lost councils like Guildford and Chelmsford and large numbers of council seats in councils like Tunbridge Wells because of the anti development vote.
(Though the Greens did promise to build the fewest new houses in 2019, in actuality the Tories and LDs both promised to build the same number of new homes in 2019 in their manifestos). Of course delivering Brexit and tightening immigration controls should also reduce demand for new housing over time.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer has challenges. But you can't seriously think that one photo that is perceived by some as "cringey" is sufficient to knock him off the 'serious and competent' pedestal?
The problem with many of the partisan on here is that one error from the opposing side (a photo, even for christ's sake a facial expression) is cited as the end of days, while more serious errors from their own side (e.g. lying and dissembling) are just part of their leader's appeal and show what a great guy he is. It worries me.
UK Tories aim to chip away at ‘red wall’ in key electoral test for Boris Johnson A Tory win in the Hartlepool by-election would be a disaster for Labour, which has held the seat since 1974.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
I would have preferred Starmer, not to have pulled the John Lewis stunt, a photo opportunity straight out of the Johnson playbook. Personally speaking I do think it made Starmer look like a dick, in the same way, every time Johnson pulls a ridiculous campaigning stunt, he too looks like a dick.
Although Johnson's hilarious comic capers keep the fanbois happy, so it must be different.
Boris Johnson's 3am moments won't be about wallpaper. The two words that are hanging over his head and which if anything will convince people that he is unfit to be PM are: care homes.
Cash for Curtains SOLVED: Carrie simply needs to accept the BBC’s invitation to join this year’s Strictly contest, and the fee will pay for the redecoration.
Or I'm a Celebrity....
The decor would likely not be up to her standards.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer does no stunts - You cant be PM with less personality than your opponent! Starmer does stunts - You cant be PM doing stunts like that!
Have Starmer critics thought maybe they just dont like him because he is a lefty, not because of his personality?
No, he's just not very good and it's disappointing because we need a strong opposition to the government more than ever given how our liberties are being curtailed. A good opposition leader would be planning with Tory rebels right now to defeat the government on their likely renewal of the virus measures in September. Instead he'll bitch for about two seconds and then quietly vote in favour leaving 60-80 Tory rebels wondering what they need to do to get the opposition to actually bloody oppose.
Rightly or wrongly from a public health perspective our liberties have been curtailed for the past 13 months.
Not a peep from anyone until the week before last or somesuch.
With ongoing huge popularity as evidenced in the polls why on earth would they decide to change policy now? Keep us if not scared, then anxious and in need of nanny.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
The problem was the look of disdain on his face as he looked at the John Lewis product
That's just his normal facial expression when looking at anything or anyone though. John Lewis should not be offended.
He’s not very good at stunts is he?
No and I think that is because he does feel that they are beneath him and they make him feel and look uncomfortable.
He strikes me as someone who likes the idea of politics a lot more than the grubby reality. He no doubt fondly imagines he is going to be involved in some refined battle of ideas where his intellect could show. Boris generally makes mince meat of people like that with a self deprecating joke or a cutting quip. Boris entertains whilst SKS bores. Its not a contest.
UK Tories aim to chip away at ‘red wall’ in key electoral test for Boris Johnson A Tory win in the Hartlepool by-election would be a disaster for Labour, which has held the seat since 1974.
I suspect Labour's issue here will be in GOTV. Starmer just doesn't excite.
As I have said before - what on earth is the reason to go out and vote for Labour next Thursday? Their Leader? His team? Their policies?
All they have right now is "because he's not Boris". Hardly a ringing endorsement for the political process however you look at it.
Biden won because he was not Trump last year, Hollande won because he was not Sarkozy in 2012, Starmer could win because he is not Boris in 2024 if Boris becomes unpopular
What these charts fairly consistently show is that the UK not only started vaccinating much earlier but continues to vaccinate quicker than the EU as a whole. We are roughly 13% of EU +UK and in this table we have 20% of new vaccines. The result is that our lead over the EU increases as we head to full vaccination and we will be there 2 -2.5 months ahead of the EU.
Which will be worth a few thousand lives in each of the major countries but in the overall scheme of things for the pandemic is not likely to be that material. Italy and Belgium are already well ahead of us in deaths per million and will move more so but it is unlikely that France and Germany will catch up.
Economically, our faster vaccination means that our recovery should be rough a quarter ahead of the EU but we were hit harder than most with more severe lockdowns so a faster recovery was pretty likely anyway.
What this might mean for the government is that the considerable credit that it is getting for fast and effective roll out is likely to fade fairly quickly and may well be gone by the end of this year when the focus will be on the overall performance where the UK is mid table at best, not even that on some measures. It seems probable to me that Tory leads will wane considerably at that point.
I'm going to stick my neck out here and make a clear and unambiguous prediction without caveat.
I think the vaccine rollout has been so good, and so popular, and so demonstrably more competent than elsewhere, that it will be the exception that proves the rule. The electorate will do gratitude, this one time, and the Tories will increase their majority at the next general election (I am reminded of a certain infamous article, yes).
Boris Johnson's 3am moments won't be about wallpaper. The two words that are hanging over his head and which if anything will convince people that he is unfit to be PM are: care homes.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer has challenges. But you can't seriously think that one photo that is perceived by some as "cringey" is sufficient to knock him off the 'serious and competent' pedestal?
The problem with many of the partisan on here is that one error from the opposing side (a photo, even for christ's sake a facial expression) is cited as the end of days, while more serious errors from their own side (e.g. lying and dissembling) are just part of their leader's appeal and show what a great guy he is. It worries me.
Not really, but he had an opportunity to make a serious point about supporting the high street or something, meeting with John Lewis management to see how they intend to bounceback from lockdown. Anything.
Boris has that façade of being Boris. It's taken him years to do that and turn it into an electoral asset.
My worry is that Labour are absolutely clueless about what their leader's strengths and weaknesses are. Starmer is never going to be about the bants, fighting Boris on that turf is a loser for him. He needs to be "serious man for serious times" but just a lot less wooden and dull.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer does no stunts - You cant be PM with less personality than your opponent! Starmer does stunts - You cant be PM doing stunts like that!
Have Starmer critics thought maybe they just dont like him because he is a lefty, not because of his personality?
No, he's just not very good and it's disappointing because we need a strong opposition to the government more than ever given how our liberties are being curtailed. A good opposition leader would be planning with Tory rebels right now to defeat the government on their likely renewal of the virus measures in September. Instead he'll bitch for about two seconds and then quietly vote in favour leaving 60-80 Tory rebels wondering what they need to do to get the opposition to actually bloody oppose.
I think a fair position in September is that you renew the rules, but they are not enforced but can be “switched on” by a minister without a parliamentary vote. That can only be done once, and once only, for the next 12 months only, and fit a maximum of 2 weeks.
Basically designed to mean if there is a crisis there can be an urgent response but only enough to buy time for parliament to decide
It seems that Johnson's approval ratings have been impacted by the sleaze allegations, however this has not changed the headline voting figures.
Therefore, it seems to me that Labour is not doing enough on the other side for people to switch. They need to get some policies into place and also change up their top team.
What these charts fairly consistently show is that the UK not only started vaccinating much earlier but continues to vaccinate quicker than the EU as a whole. We are roughly 13% of EU +UK and in this table we have 20% of new vaccines. The result is that our lead over the EU increases as we head to full vaccination and we will be there 2 -2.5 months ahead of the EU.
Which will be worth a few thousand lives in each of the major countries but in the overall scheme of things for the pandemic is not likely to be that material. Italy and Belgium are already well ahead of us in deaths per million and will move more so but it is unlikely that France and Germany will catch up.
Economically, our faster vaccination means that our recovery should be rough a quarter ahead of the EU but we were hit harder than most with more severe lockdowns so a faster recovery was pretty likely anyway.
What this might mean for the government is that the considerable credit that it is getting for fast and effective roll out is likely to fade fairly quickly and may well be gone by the end of this year when the focus will be on the overall performance where the UK is mid table at best, not even that on some measures. It seems probable to me that Tory leads will wane considerably at that point.
I'm going to stick my neck out here and make a clear and unambiguous prediction without caveat.
I think the vaccine rollout has been so good, and so popular, and so demonstrably more competent than elsewhere, that it will be the exception that proves the rule. The electorate will do gratitude, this one time, and the Tories will increase their majority at the next general election (I am reminded of a certain infamous article, yes).
The Tories may increase their majority but if they do it won't be because of something that went well 3 years before. It will be because they have kept the economy rolling after the initial recovery and delivered employment and investment to their red wall seats. Which is possible but not nailed on by any means.
Mr. Ace, does any major UK party advocate England leaving the UK?
No, but one major party is pursuing agendas that push away the other countries, or treat them as occupied zones.
You mean implementing legislation that a majority in parliament votes for?
I can see why you might not like that
Yes, the tyranny of an English majority in Westminster is behind the disquiet in the other countries. The shafting of the DUP being a pertinent one this week.
English nationalism is a form of blind exceptionalism.
It barely recognises the existence either of the other nations in the Union, and promotes an aggressive “unitarism” versus what looks like an increasingly federalist polity.
It resents or denies any impingement on executive British (but really English) sovereignty, whether internal (local government, the judiciary), or external (EU).
Boris’s “cake and eat it” is pure English nationalism. So is the slashing of the foreign aid budget.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer does no stunts - You cant be PM with less personality than your opponent! Starmer does stunts - You cant be PM doing stunts like that!
Have Starmer critics thought maybe they just dont like him because he is a lefty, not because of his personality?
No, he's just not very good and it's disappointing because we need a strong opposition to the government more than ever given how our liberties are being curtailed. A good opposition leader would be planning with Tory rebels right now to defeat the government on their likely renewal of the virus measures in September. Instead he'll bitch for about two seconds and then quietly vote in favour leaving 60-80 Tory rebels wondering what they need to do to get the opposition to actually bloody oppose.
Rightly or wrongly from a public health perspective our liberties have been curtailed for the past 13 months.
Not a peep from anyone until the week before last or somesuch.
With ongoing huge popularity as evidenced in the polls why on earth would they decide to change policy now? Keep us if not scared, then anxious and in need of nanny.
But from the perspective of the opposition party why continue to wave through something that keeps the government in power?
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer does no stunts - You cant be PM with less personality than your opponent! Starmer does stunts - You cant be PM doing stunts like that!
Have Starmer critics thought maybe they just dont like him because he is a lefty, not because of his personality?
No, he's just not very good and it's disappointing because we need a strong opposition to the government more than ever given how our liberties are being curtailed. A good opposition leader would be planning with Tory rebels right now to defeat the government on their likely renewal of the virus measures in September. Instead he'll bitch for about two seconds and then quietly vote in favour leaving 60-80 Tory rebels wondering what they need to do to get the opposition to actually bloody oppose.
Rightly or wrongly from a public health perspective our liberties have been curtailed for the past 13 months.
Not a peep from anyone until the week before last or somesuch.
With ongoing huge popularity as evidenced in the polls why on earth would they decide to change policy now? Keep us if not scared, then anxious and in need of nanny.
Alternatively - after a number of false starts, we have a defined policy program to deal with COVID19. That is working....
I expected to find that it was a speeding offence!
Good morning, everyone.
Shocking - this is the kind of thing the Soviet T-15 torpedo was designed to deal with.
Reminds me of the Father Ted parody of Speed where he had to drive a milk float that was rigged to explode if the speedometer dropped below 4 mph. One of the funniest sitcom episodes I've ever seen.
Sturgeon’s interview on this morning’s Today programme was a car crash - no answers to the substantive questions on Scexit, just the same desperate bluff and bluster she attempted with Marr what’s incredible here is that, given previous interviews, Sturgeon must know what questions she’s going to get asked .... and yet still she has no answers on currency, borders and the harsh fiscal reality of scexit
What these charts fairly consistently show is that the UK not only started vaccinating much earlier but continues to vaccinate quicker than the EU as a whole. We are roughly 13% of EU +UK and in this table we have 20% of new vaccines. The result is that our lead over the EU increases as we head to full vaccination and we will be there 2 -2.5 months ahead of the EU.
Which will be worth a few thousand lives in each of the major countries but in the overall scheme of things for the pandemic is not likely to be that material. Italy and Belgium are already well ahead of us in deaths per million and will move more so but it is unlikely that France and Germany will catch up.
Economically, our faster vaccination means that our recovery should be rough a quarter ahead of the EU but we were hit harder than most with more severe lockdowns so a faster recovery was pretty likely anyway.
What this might mean for the government is that the considerable credit that it is getting for fast and effective roll out is likely to fade fairly quickly and may well be gone by the end of this year when the focus will be on the overall performance where the UK is mid table at best, not even that on some measures. It seems probable to me that Tory leads will wane considerably at that point.
I'm going to stick my neck out here and make a clear and unambiguous prediction without caveat.
I think the vaccine rollout has been so good, and so popular, and so demonstrably more competent than elsewhere, that it will be the exception that proves the rule. The electorate will do gratitude, this one time, and the Tories will increase their majority at the next general election (I am reminded of a certain infamous article, yes).
The Tories may increase their majority but if they do it won't be because of something that went well 3 years before. It will be because they have kept the economy rolling after the initial recovery and delivered employment and investment to their red wall seats. Which is possible but not nailed on by any means.
7% growth in 2021 followed by 4% in 2022. It's going to be an absolutely gigantic bounce. I wouldn't be surprised if the 2021 figure ended up a bit higher than that closing in on 8%.
Mr. Ace, does any major UK party advocate England leaving the UK?
No, but one major party is pursuing agendas that push away the other countries, or treat them as occupied zones.
You mean implementing legislation that a majority in parliament votes for?
I can see why you might not like that
Yes, the tyranny of an English majority in Westminster is behind the disquiet in the other countries. The shafting of the DUP being a pertinent one this week.
English nationalism is a form of blind exceptionalism.
It barely recognises the existence either of the other nations in the Union, and promotes an aggressive “unitarism” versus what looks like an increasingly federalist polity.
It resents or denies any impingement on executive British (but really English) sovereignty, whether internal (local government, the judiciary), or external (EU).
Boris’s “cake and eat it” is pure English nationalism. So is the slashing of the foreign aid budget.
England is the only nation in the Union that does not exist actually, every other nation now has its own Parliament unlike England and decides most of its own domestic policy. If the Tories win a majority in England in 2024 again but Starmer becomes PM thanks to support from Welsh Labour MPs and the SNP that will become a major issue, especially as he may ignore EVEL to get his way on English legislation.
It seems that Johnson's approval ratings have been impacted by the sleaze allegations, however this has not changed the headline voting figures.
Therefore, it seems to me that Labour is not doing enough on the other side for people to switch. They need to get some policies into place and also change up their top team.
A good post. The Government is riding high on a well-oiled vaccination programme, the pubs open, and free money (4th stage SSEI grants are being paid as we speak).
Not so much the wallpaper, but I did think the "bodies piled high" allegation would shift opinion. On that score Cummings' fox is shot...unless he has a recording.
Boris Johnson's 3am moments won't be about wallpaper. The two words that are hanging over his head and which if anything will convince people that he is unfit to be PM are: care homes.
It really should be one word: airports.
Not so much. That was a lockdown issue. In the round, it is difficult to say what came from where and when. Closing down the country would certainly have helped as would a strict lockdown. As we have seen. But without vaccines you are just squeezing the tube not emptying it (!).
But the care homes policy, a domestic policy affecting people here, has been responsible for immense and ongoing suffering bordering on cruel and inhumane treatment.
France and the EU not doing too badly.....that'll have Max and Leon crying into their cornflakes
There is a curious strand that thinks people in the UK will be upset that the EU vaccination programme has improved. I see no evidence for that.
Yes, their programme having been slower than ours has been sharply focused upon, it emphasises our good roll out and the European Commission, Macron and the German government leaking were early on quite blatantly trying to turn their dispute with AZ into a dispute with the UK and that rankled.
But the EU having sped up is great news for everyone. Of course once they got supplies and resolved bureaucratic issues they could go very fast indeed, and that's fantastic.
It doesnt mean their vaccine programme failings which will extend the pandemic for them by several months do not exist, just as our earlier vaccine rollout does not mean our own big pandemic failings do not exist.
As has been made clear theoretically any EU nation could have sought supplies outside or not through the shared programme. Whatever positives in supposed fairness exists that has had a negative result of delay and they need to learn lessons, all places have their own lessons to learn.
That doesnt mean people want the situation to be bad.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer does no stunts - You cant be PM with less personality than your opponent! Starmer does stunts - You cant be PM doing stunts like that!
Have Starmer critics thought maybe they just dont like him because he is a lefty, not because of his personality?
No, he's just not very good and it's disappointing because we need a strong opposition to the government more than ever given how our liberties are being curtailed. A good opposition leader would be planning with Tory rebels right now to defeat the government on their likely renewal of the virus measures in September. Instead he'll bitch for about two seconds and then quietly vote in favour leaving 60-80 Tory rebels wondering what they need to do to get the opposition to actually bloody oppose.
If there are domestic restrictions by 22/06 then I'd support letters to Graham Brady. If there's domestic restrictions in September I'd be mightily tempted to quit the party.
Sturgeon’s interview on this morning’s Today programme was a car crash - no answers to the substantive questions on Scexit, just the same desperate bluff and bluster she attempted with Marr what’s incredible here is that, given previous interviews, Sturgeon must know what questions she’s going to get asked .... and yet still she has no answers on currency, borders and the harsh fiscal reality of scexit
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer does no stunts - You cant be PM with less personality than your opponent! Starmer does stunts - You cant be PM doing stunts like that!
Have Starmer critics thought maybe they just dont like him because he is a lefty, not because of his personality?
No, he's just not very good and it's disappointing because we need a strong opposition to the government more than ever given how our liberties are being curtailed. A good opposition leader would be planning with Tory rebels right now to defeat the government on their likely renewal of the virus measures in September. Instead he'll bitch for about two seconds and then quietly vote in favour leaving 60-80 Tory rebels wondering what they need to do to get the opposition to actually bloody oppose.
Rightly or wrongly from a public health perspective our liberties have been curtailed for the past 13 months.
Not a peep from anyone until the week before last or somesuch.
With ongoing huge popularity as evidenced in the polls why on earth would they decide to change policy now? Keep us if not scared, then anxious and in need of nanny.
But from the perspective of the opposition party why continue to wave through something that keeps the government in power?
BLOODY GOOD QUESTION!!!
As I have said many times on here over the past months. Jeremy Corbyn might have been a filthy anti-semite but at least he knew what Her Majesty's Opposition was for.
It’s curious that the Tories are happy to write off London, despite winning there not long ago. Not something they want to talk about.
Even Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown and Corbyn in 2019 won London.
The Tories only won London under Boris before Brexit and then they had zero chance of winning Red Wall seats like Hartlepool.
They have simply swapped wealthy London Remain seats like Enfield Southgate and Richmond Park they won in 2010 and 2015 for working class redwall Leave seats like West Bromwich and Burnley they won in 2019
The Tories’ problems in London pre-date Brexit. North London suburbs delivered the biggest pro-Labour swings of anywhere, in 1997. Then, the capital showed a further pro-Labour swing in 2001. Labour outperformed its national results in London in 2010, 2015, 2017, and 2019.
The Tories did enjoy quite a good run in the capital in 2002-2008. But, then it all petered out. A lot of working and middle class owner occupiers moved out to Herts., Essex, and North Kent in the past 25 years, and then the Conservatives lost upper middle class remain voters after 2016.
Front page headline 'What a boost for Britain ' on vaccine rollout and plummeting infections
And on the inside 'The Jokes on you , Sir Keir' referring to his woeful photo stunt
It was an avoidable error by Starmer and he needs better advisors
Quite right, Starmer's woeful photo stunt at John Lewis demeans his office.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Boris has that priced in. Starmer is supposed to be serious and competent. He's already failed at the latter and now he's failing at the former with that cringey photo.
Starmer does no stunts - You cant be PM with less personality than your opponent! Starmer does stunts - You cant be PM doing stunts like that!
Have Starmer critics thought maybe they just dont like him because he is a lefty, not because of his personality?
No, he's just not very good and it's disappointing because we need a strong opposition to the government more than ever given how our liberties are being curtailed. A good opposition leader would be planning with Tory rebels right now to defeat the government on their likely renewal of the virus measures in September. Instead he'll bitch for about two seconds and then quietly vote in favour leaving 60-80 Tory rebels wondering what they need to do to get the opposition to actually bloody oppose.
Rightly or wrongly from a public health perspective our liberties have been curtailed for the past 13 months.
Not a peep from anyone until the week before last or somesuch.
With ongoing huge popularity as evidenced in the polls why on earth would they decide to change policy now? Keep us if not scared, then anxious and in need of nanny.
Alternatively - after a number of false starts, we have a defined policy program to deal with COVID19. That is working....
And in the meantime unparalleled restrictions on our liberty have been waved through with a smile.
As I said, perhaps this was necessary. But the enthusiasm with which the country, not least here on PB, has embraced the restrictions of freedoms has been imo extraodinary.
UK Tories aim to chip away at ‘red wall’ in key electoral test for Boris Johnson A Tory win in the Hartlepool by-election would be a disaster for Labour, which has held the seat since 1974.
I suspect Labour's issue here will be in GOTV. Starmer just doesn't excite.
As I have said before - what on earth is the reason to go out and vote for Labour next Thursday? Their Leader? His team? Their policies?
All they have right now is "because he's not Boris". Hardly a ringing endorsement for the political process however you look at it.
Biden won because he was not Trump last year, Hollande won because he was not Sarkozy in 2012, Starmer could win because he is not Boris in 2024 if Boris becomes unpopular
A measured analysis as usual HYUFD. Thankyou.
Fortunately I have work to do before the fanbois arrive to chant "loser, loser" at anyone who isn't on their team.
France and the EU not doing too badly.....that'll have Max and Leon crying into their cornflakes
There is a curious strand that thinks people in the UK will be upset that the EU vaccination programme has improved. I see no evidence for that.
Yes, their programme having been slower than ours has been sharply focused upon, it emphasises our good roll out and the European Commission, Macron and the German government leaking were early on quite blatantly trying to turn their dispute with AZ into a dispute with the UK and that rankled.
But the EU having sped up is great news for everyone. Of course once they got supplies and resolved bureaucratic issues they could go very fast indeed, and that's fantastic.
It doesnt mean their vaccine programme failings which will extend the pandemic for them by several months do not exist, just as our earlier vaccine rollout does not mean our own big pandemic failings do not exist.
As has been made clear theoretically any EU nation could have sought supplies outside or not through the shared programme. Whatever positives in supposed fairness exists that has had a negative result of delay and they need to learn lessons, all places have their own lessons to learn.
That doesnt mean people want the situation to be bad.
On your first point - yes.
However real anger is justified by:
1 - The transparent diversion tactics. 2 - The public trashing of a cost-effective vaccine that works, creating hesitation in the wider world outside Europe. That will cause people to die.
Anyway, its Friday morning so lets set a nice test of legal and moral right and wrong.
It is only right that an individual should be able to choose which laws apply to them. It is only right that when a complaint is made and an investigation carried out to determine if that individual has broken the strict professional code that directs their behaviour, that the accused is able to discard the findings against them and carry on in role.
Its only fair. Lawyers get to dismiss professional misconduct convictions. Doctors. Bent Coppers. People who steal from work. So it is an outrage for people to think there is something wrong with the Prime Minister being able to simply dismiss the professional misconduct findings that are presented to him about his behaviour.
The Prime Minister should be subject to the same courts as the rest of us. If he receives a criminal conviction at a court of law then of course he should resign.
Anonymous people claiming on social media that he has done something wrong is not a court of law.
I was thinking about this last night.
Does anyone know the financial year in which this work was done? I wonder if the reluctance to reveal who repaid the loan was that it was a bridging loan - ie Boris claimed 2 years worth of the refurbishment allowance (£60k) and used the loan to bridge the gap.
I’ve no idea if that would be in the rules (strikes me as a bit of a grey area) or if it happened but it’s a possibility he might not want to put out there as it is certainly a but cute
No he is crooked and had some creepy chum who wanted favours pay for it.
France and the EU not doing too badly.....that'll have Max and Leon crying into their cornflakes
There is a curious strand that thinks people in the UK will be upset that the EU vaccination programme has improved. I see no evidence for that.
Yes, their programme having been slower than ours has been sharply focused upon, it emphasises our good roll out and the European Commission, Macron and the German government leaking were early on quite blatantly trying to turn their dispute with AZ into a dispute with the UK and that rankled.
But the EU having sped up is great news for everyone. Of course once they got supplies and resolved bureaucratic issues they could go very fast indeed, and that's fantastic.
It doesnt mean their vaccine programme failings which will extend the pandemic for them by several months do not exist, just as our earlier vaccine rollout does not mean our own big pandemic failings do not exist.
As has been made clear theoretically any EU nation could have sought supplies outside or not through the shared programme. Whatever positives in supposed fairness exists that has had a negative result of delay and they need to learn lessons, all places have their own lessons to learn.
That doesnt mean people want the situation to be bad.
I think real anger is justified by:
1 - The transparent diversion tactics. 2 - The trashing of a vaccine, creating hesitation in the wider world outside Europe. That will cause people to die.
The EU have revealed themselves to be absolute arseholes on this matter.
But there is still a decent chunk of people looking to use EU failure to justify Brexit (in the absence of sunny uplands). They will be disappointed to see Europe “open up” a month or so after us.
What these charts fairly consistently show is that the UK not only started vaccinating much earlier but continues to vaccinate quicker than the EU as a whole. We are roughly 13% of EU +UK and in this table we have 20% of new vaccines. The result is that our lead over the EU increases as we head to full vaccination and we will be there 2 -2.5 months ahead of the EU.
Which will be worth a few thousand lives in each of the major countries but in the overall scheme of things for the pandemic is not likely to be that material. Italy and Belgium are already well ahead of us in deaths per million and will move more so but it is unlikely that France and Germany will catch up.
Economically, our faster vaccination means that our recovery should be rough a quarter ahead of the EU but we were hit harder than most with more severe lockdowns so a faster recovery was pretty likely anyway.
What this might mean for the government is that the considerable credit that it is getting for fast and effective roll out is likely to fade fairly quickly and may well be gone by the end of this year when the focus will be on the overall performance where the UK is mid table at best, not even that on some measures. It seems probable to me that Tory leads will wane considerably at that point.
I'm going to stick my neck out here and make a clear and unambiguous prediction without caveat.
I think the vaccine rollout has been so good, and so popular, and so demonstrably more competent than elsewhere, that it will be the exception that proves the rule. The electorate will do gratitude, this one time, and the Tories will increase their majority at the next general election (I am reminded of a certain infamous article, yes).
Striking and plausible. Hats off. I'm not ruling that sort of scenario out but I will let a year pass before making the official 'newpunditry-newpolitics' long range call for the next GE.
I price it as follows atm -
Tory majority 50% Hung parliament 40% Labour majority 10%
Worth noting that when the 2017 local election seats were fought, the Tories also had an 11% lead over Labour on the actual result - albeit on 38%-27%. If Labour are to make any gains, they look to be from LibDems (7% now versus 18% actual in 2017). Labour will stand still as against the Tories at best (note YouGov has 3% for Refuk, but as most seats won't have a candidate that could add a point or two to the Tory lead).
Those seats last fought in 2016 could prove to be horrible for Labour, where they actually finished one point ahead of the Tories on 31%, Tories on 30%, LibDems 15%, UKIP 12%. Looking at projections for these seats - where they won 1326 Councillors to the Tories 842 - may be where the gloom in Labour's internal machine is coming from.
Starmer could be down 200-250 councillors after next Thursday.
I've almost always voted Tory. I would still do so in a general election. However I'm pretty fed up with local Tory planning decisions and am flirting with voting Green for some candidates. If I'm representative then these local elections do not represent overall opinion.
Local planning wont change much whomever is in charge.
Actually that's the case with a lot of local matters - not many choices are often open, around national diktats, and the ones that are probably dont fall along simple party political lines (which doesn't stop them pretending it does).
What these charts fairly consistently show is that the UK not only started vaccinating much earlier but continues to vaccinate quicker than the EU as a whole. We are roughly 13% of EU +UK and in this table we have 20% of new vaccines. The result is that our lead over the EU increases as we head to full vaccination and we will be there 2 -2.5 months ahead of the EU.
Which will be worth a few thousand lives in each of the major countries but in the overall scheme of things for the pandemic is not likely to be that material. Italy and Belgium are already well ahead of us in deaths per million and will move more so but it is unlikely that France and Germany will catch up.
Economically, our faster vaccination means that our recovery should be rough a quarter ahead of the EU but we were hit harder than most with more severe lockdowns so a faster recovery was pretty likely anyway.
What this might mean for the government is that the considerable credit that it is getting for fast and effective roll out is likely to fade fairly quickly and may well be gone by the end of this year when the focus will be on the overall performance where the UK is mid table at best, not even that on some measures. It seems probable to me that Tory leads will wane considerably at that point.
I'm going to stick my neck out here and make a clear and unambiguous prediction without caveat.
I think the vaccine rollout has been so good, and so popular, and so demonstrably more competent than elsewhere, that it will be the exception that proves the rule. The electorate will do gratitude, this one time, and the Tories will increase their majority at the next general election (I am reminded of a certain infamous article, yes).
Yep could be although in a month or three the EU and many other countries will be where we are (great article btw Robert) and the question then becomes when the UK is in the same position as everywhere else (and don't forget we are still in lockdown while we get there) will the public be so forgiving?
It’s curious that the Tories are happy to write off London, despite winning there not long ago. Not something they want to talk about.
Even Ed Miliband and Gordon Brown and Corbyn in 2019 won London.
The Tories only won London under Boris before Brexit and then they had zero chance of winning Red Wall seats like Hartlepool.
They have simply swapped wealthy London Remain seats like Enfield Southgate and Richmond Park they won in 2010 and 2015 for working class redwall Leave seats like West Bromwich and Burnley they won in 2019
The Tories’ problems in London pre-date Brexit. North London suburbs delivered the biggest pro-Labour swings of anywhere, in 1997. Then, the capital showed a further pro-Labour swing in 2001. Labour outperformed its national results in London in 2010, 2015, 2017, and 2019.
The Tories did enjoy quite a good run in the capital in 2002-2008. But, then it all petered out. A lot of working and middle class owner occupiers moved out to Herts., Essex, and North Kent in the past 25 years, and then the Conservatives lost upper middle class remain voters after 2016.
True, it is a loss of owner occupiers in London coupled with Brexit that has cost the Tories the capital.
Indeed, even Kensington went Labour in 2017 and it, Chelsea and Fulham and Cities of London and Westminster are all marginal seats now, in 1997 Kensington and Chelsea and Cities of London and Westminster stayed solid blue even as the rest of the country swung heavily to Labour. Kensington and Chelsea was the ultimate Tory safe seat, held by Alan Clark and Michael Portillo, now the Tories will be lucky to hold Kensington certainly next time.
The only safe Tory seats in London now are right on the edge of London in the outer suburbs and Essex and Kent and Hertfordshire borders and tended to vote for Brexit, places like Bexleyheath and Crayford and Old Bexley and Sidcup and Orpington, Romford, Hornchurch and Upminster, Sutton and Cheam and Upminster
Comments
We had a very good lib dem personal friend who we always voted for at locals
However, for me next thursday's results from Scotland, Wales and Hartlepool are the main ones of interest and the headline makers
A Tory win in the Hartlepool by-election would be a disaster for Labour, which has held the seat since 1974.
https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-tories-labour-red-wall-election-hartlepool/
Which major English 🏴 party is pledging English 🏴 independence? In the same way that the SNP are pledging Scottish 🏴 independence?
The problem is the PM has no honour, not that the CPS need to get involved.
If the smaller nations want to be part of a union that means accepting that sometimes decisions will be made by the bigger union that you don't like.
That was the case with Europe and it's the case with the UK. Either you want to be part of a union, or you want control, you can't have both.
Would an independent Scotland continue to be in the Common Travel Area?
Sturgeon says "exclusion would be in no one's interest".
But I wonder whether Brussels would allow it when an Indy Scotland applied for entry to the EU?
They have plenty of history of making decisions in no one's interest, including their own.
In electoral terms, however, it looks like a huge bit of self-gerrymandering by Labour.
I can see why you might not like that
Virtually nothing visible in my bit of Leics though.
I mean, could anybody imagine our Prime Minister engaging in cheap publicity stunts to try to pretend he's a man of the people? He has far more dignity than that. Perish the thought.
Which will be worth a few thousand lives in each of the major countries but in the overall scheme of things for the pandemic is not likely to be that material. Italy and Belgium are already well ahead of us in deaths per million and will move more so but it is unlikely that France and Germany will catch up.
Economically, our faster vaccination means that our recovery should be rough a quarter ahead of the EU but we were hit harder than most with more severe lockdowns so a faster recovery was pretty likely anyway.
What this might mean for the government is that the considerable credit that it is getting for fast and effective roll out is likely to fade fairly quickly and may well be gone by the end of this year when the focus will be on the overall performance where the UK is mid table at best, not even that on some measures. It seems probable to me that Tory leads will wane considerably at that point.
Dr. Foxy, there's one country. This four countries nonsense is a daft line.
What policies do you think are being followed to deliberately antagonise other parts of the UK?
[If it's leaving the EU I'd pre-emptively remind you that that was the result of both a referendum and votes in the Commons].
If Scotland and Northern Ireland were really going to be shafted by Boris then he would have gone to No Deal Brexit and imposed a hard border in Ireland
The media is interested in bullshit. We’ve seen that time and again in COVID. If the government was addressing every topic you’d accuse them of dancing to the Mail’s tune or something
Starmer does stunts - You cant be PM doing stunts like that!
Have Starmer critics thought maybe they just dont like him because he is a lefty, not because of his personality?
The Tories only won London under Boris before Brexit and then they had zero chance of winning Red Wall seats like Hartlepool.
They have simply swapped wealthy London Remain seats like Enfield Southgate and Richmond Park they won in 2010 and 2015 for working class redwall Leave seats like West Bromwich and Burnley they won in 2019
Unless you have that information, combined with a strict stratified rollout it's not really possible to judge a vaccine effect till you have a large section of the population covered.
Boris is saying people should vote Scottish Conservatives and there should not be a second referendum. He's not actually prejudged the election results.
Is that a revival? Perhaps from the nadir Leonard had lead them to, but it would be quite the revival of Labour's media operation to successfully portray that as an electoral revival.
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/man-arrested-after-4mph-police-5356930?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
That was a pattern shown across the Home Counties in 2019 when the Tories lost councils like Guildford and Chelmsford and large numbers of council seats in councils like Tunbridge Wells because of the anti development vote.
(Though the Greens did promise to build the fewest new houses in 2019, in actuality the Tories and LDs both promised to build the same number of new homes in 2019 in their manifestos). Of course delivering Brexit and tightening immigration controls should also reduce demand for new housing over time.
The problem with many of the partisan on here is that one error from the opposing side (a photo, even for christ's sake a facial expression) is cited as the end of days, while more serious errors from their own side (e.g. lying and dissembling) are just part of their leader's appeal and show what a great guy he is. It worries me.
All they have right now is "because he's not Boris". Hardly a ringing endorsement for the political process however you look at it.
Although Johnson's hilarious comic capers keep the fanbois happy, so it must be different.
Not a peep from anyone until the week before last or somesuch.
With ongoing huge popularity as evidenced in the polls why on earth would they decide to change policy now? Keep us if not scared, then anxious and in need of nanny.
He strikes me as someone who likes the idea of politics a lot more than the grubby reality. He no doubt fondly imagines he is going to be involved in some refined battle of ideas where his intellect could show. Boris generally makes mince meat of people like that with a self deprecating joke or a cutting quip. Boris entertains whilst SKS bores. Its not a contest.
England has 56m people from 67m in the UK as a whole. More MPs representing English constituencies isn't exactly tyrannical.
If nationalism is being defined as 5/6 of a country having more MPs than 1/6 of a country that's a little surprising.
Anyway, I should actually go get some work done.
Good morning, everyone.
I think the vaccine rollout has been so good, and so popular, and so demonstrably more competent than elsewhere, that it will be the exception that proves the rule. The electorate will do gratitude, this one time, and the Tories will increase their majority at the next general election (I am reminded of a certain infamous article, yes).
Boris has that façade of being Boris. It's taken him years to do that and turn it into an electoral asset.
My worry is that Labour are absolutely clueless about what their leader's strengths and weaknesses are. Starmer is never going to be about the bants, fighting Boris on that turf is a loser for him. He needs to be "serious man for serious times" but just a lot less wooden and dull.
Basically designed to mean if there is a crisis there can be an urgent response but only enough to buy time for parliament to decide
Therefore, it seems to me that Labour is not doing enough on the other side for people to switch. They need to get some policies into place and also change up their top team.
English nationalism is a form of blind exceptionalism.
It barely recognises the existence either of the other nations in the Union, and promotes an aggressive “unitarism” versus what looks like an increasingly federalist polity.
It resents or denies any impingement on executive British (but really English) sovereignty, whether internal (local government, the judiciary), or external (EU).
Boris’s “cake and eat it” is pure English nationalism. So is the slashing of the foreign aid budget.
what’s incredible here is that, given previous interviews, Sturgeon must know what questions she’s going to get asked .... and yet still she has no answers on currency, borders and the harsh fiscal reality of scexit
https://twitter.com/kevverage/status/1388034835646763010?s=20
https://twitter.com/kevverage/status/1388035727397695492?s=20
57% of Scots also supported cutting the foreign aid budget
https://docs.cdn.yougov.com/4kjz7nxlyn/Internal_SpendingReview_201125.pdf
Not so much the wallpaper, but I did think the "bodies piled high" allegation would shift opinion. On that score Cummings' fox is shot...unless he has a recording.
But the care homes policy, a domestic policy affecting people here, has been responsible for immense and ongoing suffering bordering on cruel and inhumane treatment.
Yes, their programme having been slower than ours has been sharply focused upon, it emphasises our good roll out and the European Commission, Macron and the German government leaking were early on quite blatantly trying to turn their dispute with AZ into a dispute with the UK and that rankled.
But the EU having sped up is great news for everyone. Of course once they got supplies and resolved bureaucratic issues they could go very fast indeed, and that's fantastic.
It doesnt mean their vaccine programme failings which will extend the pandemic for them by several months do not exist, just as our earlier vaccine rollout does not mean our own big pandemic failings do not exist.
As has been made clear theoretically any EU nation could have sought supplies outside or not through the shared programme. Whatever positives in supposed fairness exists that has had a negative result of delay and they need to learn lessons, all places have their own lessons to learn.
That doesnt mean people want the situation to be bad.
I bought an SNP calculator the other day......
Nothing adds up but it's excellent at taking away and division.
As I have said many times on here over the past months. Jeremy Corbyn might have been a filthy anti-semite but at least he knew what Her Majesty's Opposition was for.
The Tories did enjoy quite a good run in the capital in 2002-2008. But, then it all petered out. A lot of working and middle class owner occupiers moved out to Herts., Essex, and North Kent in the past 25 years, and then the Conservatives lost upper middle class remain voters after 2016.
As I said, perhaps this was necessary. But the enthusiasm with which the country, not least here on PB, has embraced the restrictions of freedoms has been imo extraodinary.
Fortunately I have work to do before the fanbois arrive to chant "loser, loser" at anyone who isn't on their team.
However real anger is justified by:
1 - The transparent diversion tactics.
2 - The public trashing of a cost-effective vaccine that works, creating hesitation in the wider world outside Europe. That will cause people to die.
Meanwhile, Biden is having a sensationally good response to the vaccination drive there, with even Republicans now joining in:
https://navigatorresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Navigator-Update-04.29.2021.pdf
But there is still a decent chunk of people looking to use EU failure to justify Brexit (in the absence of sunny uplands). They will be disappointed to see Europe “open up” a month or so after us.
I price it as follows atm -
Tory majority 50%
Hung parliament 40%
Labour majority 10%
Actually that's the case with a lot of local matters - not many choices are often open, around national diktats, and the ones that are probably dont fall along simple party political lines (which doesn't stop them pretending it does).
Indeed, even Kensington went Labour in 2017 and it, Chelsea and Fulham and Cities of London and Westminster are all marginal seats now, in 1997 Kensington and Chelsea and Cities of London and Westminster stayed solid blue even as the rest of the country swung heavily to Labour. Kensington and Chelsea was the ultimate Tory safe seat, held by Alan Clark and Michael Portillo, now the Tories will be lucky to hold Kensington certainly next time.
The only safe Tory seats in London now are right on the edge of London in the outer suburbs and Essex and Kent and Hertfordshire borders and tended to vote for Brexit, places like Bexleyheath and Crayford and Old Bexley and Sidcup and Orpington, Romford, Hornchurch and Upminster, Sutton and Cheam and Upminster